MUHAMMAD ZAEEM KHALID and others vs BAHAUDDIN ZAKERIA UNIVERSITY
This appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan arose from the dismissal of an Intra-Court Appeal by the Lahore High Court, which had denied the appellants relief regarding the declaration of their B.Ed. Examination results. The appellants, who appeared as private candidates, had their results withheld by the Bahauddin Zakeria University due to alleged non-compliance with teaching experience requirements. While other similarly situated candidates successfully challenged the University's action via a writ petition and obtained a favorable judgment that attained finality, the appellants' own constitutional petition was dismissed by the High Court on grounds of delay. The core legal question was whether the appellants could be denied the same relief granted to similarly situated candidates solely due to the delay in approaching the court, despite their ongoing representations to university authorities. The Supreme Court held that the appellants could not be treated differently from those similarly situated, especially when the University admitted the cases were identical. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal and directed the University to declare the appellants' examination results, establishing the principle of equal treatment for similarly situated parties in administrative matters.
- Can a university deny relief to candidates when similarly situated candidates have already been granted the same relief by a court order?
- Does the principle of equality apply to administrative decisions regarding the withholding of examination results?
- Can a constitutional petition be dismissed on the ground of delay when the petitioner has been actively pursuing administrative remedies?
' MANZOOR HUSSAIN SIAL, J.---The appellants herein by leave of this Court, have challenged judgment dated 21-12-1991 of the Lahore High Court (Multan Bench), whereby Intra-Court Appeal No, 69/1991, filed by them against judgment dated 14-9-1991 of learned Single Judge of that Court, was dismissed.
2. The appellants appeared as private candidates in B.Ed. Examination (Annual 1988) held by respondents. The result of the examination was announced on 20-4-1990, but the result of the appellants as well as some other candidates was withheld on the ground that they did not teach for 9 months without break in a recognized school. The appellants made representations to the University Authorities for declaration of the result but of no avail, while Khalilur Rehman and some other candidates through Writ Petition No,1063/1990 challenged the action of the University Authorities, for withholding the result of the examination. A learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court (Multan Bench) on 14-5-1991, allowed the Writ Petition and directed the University Authorities to declare the result of the Examination. The University Authorities did not assail the aforesaid judgment before the Supreme Court and the same attained finality.
3. The appellants also invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court for the same relief but the Writ Petition was dismissed on the ground that they had approached the Court with delay.
4. Leave to appeal was granted by this Court on 27-4-1992, to consider the contention that the appellants were not granted the relief like others similarly situated on the ground of delay which did not occur due to any lapse on their part as they were not associated with the proceedings and had been making representations to the University Authorities.
5. We have heard learned counsel for appellants as well as the Controller of Examination, Baha-ud- Din Zakaria University who appeared in person. The Controller Examination admitted that the case of the appellants was identical to that of Khalilur Rehman and others whose result had been declared in compliance with the order of the High Court. He has also not controverted the submission made by the appellants' counsel that the appellants had been making representations to the University Authorities for the declaration of the result.
6. In these circumstances the appellants cannot be treated differently from those similarly situated at the hands of the University Authorities.
7. In the result this appeal is allowed with a direction to the respondents to declare the result of the appellants in the Second Annual 1988 B.Ed. Examination. As the respondents did not seriously contest this appeal, there shall be no order as to costs.
Cited by 13 cases
- Muhammad Nawaz etc vs M/s. Cadbury Pakistan Ltd., Karachi and others 2025 PLJ Tr.C. (NIRC) 49
- MUHAMMAD MANZOOR AWAN vs AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF AZAD 2015 PLC (C.S.) 1533
- Executive Engineer, River Division Basira, Muzaffargarh. vs Punjab Labour 2015 LHC 1250
- Punjab Seed Corporation through Director Admin Office, etc. vs Chairman, Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal No.2, Multan, etc 2015 LHC 1195
- PUNJAB SEED CORPORATION through Director Admn and another vs CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NO.2, MULTAN and 2 others 2015 LHC 1195, 2015 PLC 295, 2015 KLR Labour & Services Cases 58
- Tehsil Municipal Officer, T.M.A., Dera Ghazi Khan. vs Punjab Labour 2015 LHC 1209
- Water & Sanitation Agency, Multan through its Managing Director. vs Saima Ameen, etc 2015 LHC 1235
- The Irrigation and Power Department, Govt. of Punjab, etc. vs Punjab 2015 LHC 934
- ZAHEER-UL-HASSAN Versus PAKISTAN POSTAL OFFICE 2004 PLC(CS) 369
- Sheri C.B.C. and others vs K.B.C.A. and others 2003 C.L.R. 453
- SHENI C.B.B. and others vs K.B.C.A. and others 2003 YLR 1086
- ZAHEER-UL-HASSAN and another vs PAKISTAN POSTAL OFFICE through POST 2004 PLJ Lahore 545
- TEHSIL MUNICIPAL OFFICER, T.M.A. DERA GHAZI KHAN vs PUNJAB LABOUR 2015 PLJ Lahore 543