MANZOOR HUSSAIN and others vs PAKISTAN FOREST INSTITUTE and others

' ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.---This Order will dispose of both the captioned petitions for leave to appeal as they are directed against a common judgment of the Peshawar High Court dismissing two identical writ petitions, one filed by the petitioners in C.P. 368-P/95 and the other filed by the petitioners in C.P. 369-P/95.

2. Petitioners in both the petitions were the students in Pakistan Forest Institute, Peshawar.

Petitioners in C.P. 368-P/95 and petitioner No,3 in C.P. 369-P/.95 were doing the course of BSC.

Forestry while petitioners Nos.1 and 2 in C.P. 369-P/95 were admitted in the course of M.S.C. Forestry.

Both the courses consisted of five-term examinations semester system spread over a period of two years. It is an admitted position that all the petitioners failed in the annual term examination as also in the supplementary examination. They were thus, not allowed to appear in any subsequent examination either as a regular or as a private candidate to clear the subjects in which they had failed, and were dropped out in view of Regulation No,6(iv) of the Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations of the University of Peshawar for the Award of Degree in Forestry which reads as follows:--- "(iv) The student who fails in any one or all the subjects in the annual first, second, third, fourth and fifth, term examination will be eligible to appear again in the supplementary examination immediately following the annual examination but preceding the annual examination for the next term. Such student may, however, be provisionally permitted for the next term to attend the classes by the Director, Forest Education Division, Only one chance of appearing in the supplementary examination shall be allowed and the student failing in the supplementary shall not be permitted to appear in any subsequent examination either as regular or as a private candidate nor would be admitted to the classes. Candidates will be allowed to reappear in those subjects only in which they have failed.

' In case of fifth term, a second chance shall be allowed in Forest Management Plan, class room performance and viva voce. However, external examiners for supplementary examination will be different from the one who acted in the annual examination."

3. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners approached Peshawar High Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction by means of two separate writ petitions contending that the aforequoted Regulation in so far as it allowed only one chance to the failed students to appear in the supplementary examination was inconsistent with and violative of the University of Peshawar Act, 1974 and the Rules/Regulations/Statutes framed thereunder. A direction was accordingly sought to be issued to the respondents to amend the impugned provision so as to allow the failed students to clear the subjects in which they had failed. Petitioners also prayed that the respondents be directed to allow further chance to them for taking examination in the subjects in which they had failed. Petitioners also relied upon some previous judgments of the Peshawar High Court whereby an additional chance was provided to the failing students. It appears that during the course of hearing in the High Court, petitioners also referred to the recommendations made by the Board of Studies to the University Syndicate for amending clause (iv) of Regulation No,6.

4. Learned Judges of the High Court after taking note of various contentions raised by the petitioners dismissed the writ petitions by a consolidated judgment with the observation "We will not enter into the controversy of amending clause (iv) of Regulation 6 of the Forest Institution as in W.P. No,654 of 1994 it has been finally decided on 6-10-1994 by this Court that the Institution itself and the higher Authorities of the University should strictly follow the rules and they in no case would allow any body whatsoever he may be to avail more chances than the chance provided by the rules itself unless and until the rules are so amended". While parting with the cases, the learned Judges emphasised the need for amending the rules so as to provide one more chance to the failed student to clear the examinations as a private candidate. The learned Judges observed "the rules require amendment with proper methodology so that one chance is given to a private candidate in the examinations of the courses. All the professional institutions like Medical Colleges, Engineering Colleges and other such like colleges allow one or more chances to a failed student candidate to appear in the examination either as a regular or private candidate and it is obvious also in para. 16 of the prescribed procedure for private candidates appearing in the examinations in the courses of various faculties of the University".

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. The only grievance made by him is that despite the observations made in the impugned judgment as also in some earlier judgments of Peshawar High Court, the respondents have not amended Regulation No,6(iv) with the result that the petitioners stand perpetually deprived of an additional chance to clear the subjects in which they had failed and to complete the courses of their studies. We have pointed out to the learned counsel that it is for the Authorities concerned to amend the impugned Regulation and provide an additional chance to the failed students but no direction can be issued to them to do so unless the provision in question is found to be violative of or repugnant to any parent Statute. Needless to observe that the learned counsel has not brought to our notice any provision of the parent Statute which has been infringed by the impugned Regulation. Incidentally, we find from the impugned judgment that the Board of Studies in Forestry had recommended an amendment in clause (iv) of Regulation No,6 to make a provision for additional chances to the failed students for clearing the examinations and for their provisional admission but the University Syndicate turned down the recommendation. It has not been shown to us that the Syndicate was bound to implement the recommendations of the Board of Studies. In the circumstances, no interference is called for by this Court. Both the petitions are accordingly dismissed being without any merit.