JAMEELA KAUSAR Versus BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

FALAK SHER, J.‑‑‑ Mst. Jamila Kausar petitioner having secured 649 (429 as per record) marks out of 1100 in the F.Sc. (Pre‑Medical Group) Examination appearing under Roll No.740419 in Spring, 1992, held by the Intermediate and Secondary Education Board, Rawalpindi, re‑attempted in Autumn 1992 Examination with a view to improving her position under Roll No.640033 from Examination Centre No.737, Margala Model School, Saidpur, Road, Rawalpindi, and grudging against withholding of result by the respondent Board filed Writ Petition No. 972 of 1993 before Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench. Wherein it transpired that disciplinary proceedings perceived by rule 8(1) of the Boards Rules are underway against her for having used unfair means in the examination alleging to have used outside help in solving the papers. Which was disposed of requiring the respondent Board to conclude the proceedings within the spelt out time eventually culminating into her disqualification from one examination i.e. Autumn 1992 vide order conveyed on 24‑10‑1993 against which her appeal before the Appellate Committee of the Board was turned down as per communication dated 2‑3‑1994, in addition to imposition of varied penalties of the Centre Superintendent, the Deputy Superintendent, Clerk of the Centre, Examiner and Special Paper Checker.

2. Legality whereof was assailed in Writ Petition No. 230 of 1994 of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench wherein initially a learned Single Judge through an interim order dated 20‑12‑1994 directed the respondent Board to issue her result card (declaring her to have secured 66 marks in English‑A); further through a subsequent interim order dated 17‑1‑1995 directed the Chairman of the Admission Board for the Medical Colleges (Punjab) to entertain petitioner's application for admission to one of the Medical Colleges in Punjab and to grant admission in the First Year Class, in case she qualifies ,for the same condoning the delay despite the Admission Board being not a party to the proceedings nor a prayer to that effect had been. made in the writ petition. Pursuant whereto she was admitted to Quaid e‑Azam Medical College, Bahawalpur and through another miscellaneous application sought a direction to the respondent Board. for issuance of necessary certificate (NOC) which too was accorded.

3. Subsequently the writ petition was fixed before the learned Special Standing Division Bench having been constituted for dealing with matters relating to Medical Colleges throughout Punjab for maintaining consistency of policy.

4. The learned Division Bench summoned the Controller of Examination of the respondent‑Board alongwith the record perusal whereof. manifested that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner on the report of the Centre Inspectress Mrs. Inayat, Principal. Government College for Women, Gujjar Khan, Rawalpindi, revealing the following:

"That she had inspected Centre No.737 (Margala Model School, Rawalpindi) on 24‑10‑1992 and found that a‑ blank answer book bearing No.371718 was lying on the table of the Centre Superintendent whereas 45 candidates had appeared in the examination (as per attendance sheet and on spot counting). On the enquiry of the Inspector, the Centre Superintendent stated that she had kept the said answer book on the table to issue the same to a late coming candidate if need be. As per report of the Inspector she remained in the examination centre till 4‑30 p.m. and no candidate had come during her stay on that day as the examination time was from 2‑00 p.m. to 5‑00 p.m. While as per rules a candidate coming 30 minutes late could be allowed to sit in the examination. She again inspected the said centre on 29‑10‑1992 and she came to know that the impugned blank answer book had been used. As a sequel of the report of the inspector, the respondent, office checked the record and it was found that the impugned answer book was used by a candidate bearing Roll No.640033 (the petitioner). On deep examination of the impugned answer book it transpired that the pages inside the said answer book were changed while the front title/copy number of the said answer book was the same as issued in the abovesaid examination centre. Accordingly to assess the factual position the whole solved answer books in other subjects/papers of the petitioner were taken out. Further, the Discipline Committee examined the answer book of the petitioner in English Papers‑A and B, Urdu A and B, Biology A and Chemistry A and found that apparent fraud and forgery was committed. The answer books issued to the petitioner during the examination were dubious in synchronizing order and the petitioner had solved the papers from somewhere from outside on some forged/fictitious answer books while she pasted the title of the original answer book on the said forged/fictitious books with gum. This change by the petitioner by fraud and forgery is crystal clear if the said answer books are studied deeply."

5. In view whereof the learned Division Bench dismissed the writ petition for the petitioner having not been able to show any factual or legal infirmity therein vide the impugned judgment dated 1‑11‑2001 against which the present petition for leave to appeal has been preferred. Contending belated initiation of proceedings and the petitioner being in advanced stage of medical studies.

6. Wherein, we had sent for the original record perusal whereof patently demonstrates that most of the answer books had been tampered with viz. the title/front/cover page having been pasted on the stapled sheets which were subsequently tucked in covering the staple beneath; further, despite the A query no motive of malicious involvement by any of the official or functionaries of the respondent‑Board has been spelt out.

7. Resultantly, the impugned order is unexceptionable wherein, no in road could be made for the alleged belated recourse of the petitioner's stage of studies for the same would tantamount to not only reaping premium of one's own doing and encouraging perpetuation of fraud and illegalities patent on the face of the record. In this behalf, we fortified by this Court's observation made in Civil Petition No. 1175 of 1997 dated 24‑4‑1998 as under:‑‑

"Are we going to condone fraud each time and encourage foulplay? Society has already degenerated to such a low level that we are not far from touching the bottom. If lenient view is taken by the Court each time, it will only encourage rather than discourage the wrong doer. Although, it has been pointed out by the learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner has already completed major part of his curriculum and any break at this stage is bound to cause a major set back to the petitioner, as he would lost four years of his academic career, but we cannot help observing in this regard that, the entire blame for this rests on no one else but the petitioner himself."

Resultantly, the same being devoid of any substance fails and is hereby dismissed. Leave declined.

N.H.Q./J‑33/S Petition dismissed.