TAHIR SAEED QURESH1 vs THE BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE & SECONDARY
This petition for leave to appeal arose from a judgment of the Lahore High Court concerning a student's challenge to the evaluation of his Secondary Board Annual Examination papers. The petitioner, having secured the 27th position, sought re-evaluation and re-assessment of his answer books by a new panel of examiners, alongside a comparison with the answer books of higher-ranked candidates to ensure uniform marking standards. The core legal question was whether the High Court could exercise its constitutional jurisdiction to order a re-evaluation beyond the scope of the existing regulatory framework. The Supreme Court observed that the only applicable provision, Rule XV, Chapter 5 of the Rules of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Sargodha, restricts re-checking to clerical errors, such as total calculation mistakes or unmarked questions. Finding that the petitioner's papers had already been re-checked in accordance with this rule and no errors were found, the Court held that the High Court correctly refused to interfere. The judgment establishes that courts will not exercise constitutional jurisdiction to compel re-evaluation of examination papers where such action falls outside the specific statutory rules governing the educational institution.
- Can a court exercise constitutional jurisdiction to order the re-evaluation of examination papers beyond the scope of the rules provided by an educational board?
- Does the power to re-check examination papers under Rule XV, Chapter 5 of the Rules of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Sargodha include the power to re-assess the quality of marking?
- Is a candidate entitled to have their answer books compared with those of other candidates to ensure uniform marking standards in the absence of a specific rule authorizing such comparison?
- Rule XV, Chapter 5, Rules of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Sargodha
ORDER
' FAZAL ILAHI KHAN, 1.---Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 12-1-1994 passed in Writ Petition. No,14535 of 1993.
2. Petitioner who appeared in the Secondary Board Annual Examination held in 1993 under Roll No,6639 secured 728 marks out of 850 marks. He was placed in Grade A-1 and over all on 27th position in the Board. Petitioner on the basis of his previous record applied for re-checking/re- evaluation of his papers. However, no interference was made as no error, permissible for correction under Rule XV, Chapter 5 of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Sargodha was found.
Dissatisfied the petitioner approached the learned High Court in Constitutional jurisdiction with a prayer that respondents Nos.1, 2, 3 he directed to constitute a panel of examiners and place before them all the answer hooks of the petitioner for re-checking/re-evaluation and re-assessment. It was further prayed that they be also directed to place before the panel all the answer books of the candidates who have been placed senior to the petitioner with a view to ascertain that the examiner of the petitioner even maintained the same uniform standard while marking the payers of the petitioner. That direction be issued to respondent No,4 who is In charge of the' Boards in Punjab to get re-examination and re-evaluate the answer books of the petitioner on the panel of examiners to be chosen from Sargodha Board.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the judgment of the learned High Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner frankly conceded before us that there is no other provision under the Rules of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Sargodha excepting Rule XV of Chapter 5 for petitioner's redress of his grievance. The Rule relied upon reads as follows:-- Candidates appearing in all the examinations conducted by the Board shall be permitted to get their answer books re-checked to the effect that:
(1) Total have been rightly brought forward.
(2) No portion of any answer has been left unmarked.
(3) There is no mistake in the grand total on the cover of the answer book or/and
(4) The answer book has not been changed.
4. The papers were re-checked and no mistake was found in the papers of the petitioner with regard to the marks obtained by the petitioner in terms of the Rule reproduced above. The prayer made by the petitioner as referred to above does not fall within the four corners of provision of law reproduced above. The learned High Court was, therefore, right and justified in refusing to interfere in the matter of educational institution in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction beyond the scope of Rule XV of Chapter 5 of the Rules. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused and petition is dismissed.
Cited by 5 cases
- Hafsa Habib Qureshi, Taha Shah and others vs Amir Hamza and others 2023 SCP 388, 2024 PLD Supreme Court 780
- SANA GULNAZ vs SECRETARY, HEALTH GOVT. OF PUNJAB and others 2017 MLD 815
- MUHAMMAD FAROOQ WAJID vs FPSC and others 2015 PLD Lahore 457
- KAREEM BAKHSH Versus NOOR MUHAMMAD 2011 PLD 249
- MUHAMMAD HASEEB vs BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE & SECONDARY EDUCATION, LAHORE Through Chairman 2001 MLD 751