Bise |The plaintiff alleged that someone else appeared in his place in the intermediate examination, against which an FIR was registered and his secondary school certificate was canceled disqualifying him for six examinations. The trial court ruled in his favor on the declaration, but the appellate court ruled in favor of the board and rejected his claim. The High Court ruled in favor of the Board and dismissed the revision. PLJ 2023 Lahore (Note) 141
 |
| The plaintiff alleged that someone else appeared in his place in the intermediate examination, against which an FIR was registered and his secondary school certificate was canceled disqualifying him for six examinations. The trial court ruled in his favor on the declaration, but the appellate court ruled in favor of the board and rejected his claim. The High Court ruled in favor of the Board and dismissed the revision. PLJ 2023 Lahore (Note) 141 |
دعویٰ میں درخواست گزار کی مانگی گئی ریلیف:
عمران شہزاد (درخواست گزار) نے ایک دعویٰ برائے اعلان اور لازمی حکم امتناع (declaration with mandatory injunction) دائر کیا تھا۔ اس میں اس نے درج ذیل مطالبات کیے:
1. اس کے خلاف لگائے گئے شناخت میں جعلسازی کے الزامات کو ختم کیا جائے۔
2. اسے ان الزامات کے تحت چھ امتحانات کے لیے نااہل قرار دیا گیا تھا اور اس کا سیکنڈری اسکول سرٹیفکیٹ منسوخ کیا گیا تھا۔ ان فیصلوں کو کالعدم قرار دیا جائے۔
3. عدالت سے درخواست کی کہ وہ اس کے حق میں فیصلہ دے اور ان فیصلوں کو غیر قانونی قرار دے۔
جواب دہندگان کا جواب:
بورڈ آف انٹرمیڈیٹ اینڈ سیکنڈری ایجوکیشن، گوجرانوالہ (BISE Gujranwala) نے دعویٰ کا جواب دیتے ہوئے کہا:
1. شناخت میں جعلسازی کے ٹھوس شواہد موجود تھے، جن کے تحت درخواست گزار کے خلاف کارروائی کی گئی۔
2. درخواست گزار کو نوٹس بھیجے گئے تھے کہ وہ تادیبی کمیٹی کے سامنے پیش ہو، لیکن وہ پیش نہیں ہوا۔
3. غیر موجودگی میں کارروائی کرتے ہوئے اسے چھ امتحانات کے لیے نااہل قرار دیا گیا اور اس کا سیکنڈری اسکول سرٹیفکیٹ منسوخ کر دیا گیا، جو قانونی اور ضوابط کے مطابق تھا۔
فیصلہ:
1. ٹرائل کورٹ کا فیصلہ: ابتدائی طور پر ٹرائل کورٹ نے درخواست گزار کے حق میں فیصلہ دیا اور اس کا دعویٰ منظور کر لیا، جس میں بورڈ کے فیصلے کو کالعدم قرار دیا گیا۔
2. اپیلیٹ کورٹ کا فیصلہ: بورڈ نے اس فیصلے کے خلاف اپیل کی، جسے اپیلیٹ کورٹ نے قبول کیا۔ اپیلیٹ کورٹ نے بورڈ کی کارروائی کو جائز قرار دیتے ہوئے درخواست گزار کے دعوے کو مسترد کر دیا۔
3. سول ریویژن میں فیصلہ: درخواست گزار نے اپیلیٹ کورٹ کے فیصلے کے خلاف سول ریویژن دائر کی، جسے عدالت نے مسترد کر دیا۔ عدالت نے کہا کہ تادیبی اور فوجداری کارروائیاں ایک ساتھ چل سکتی ہیں، اور اپیلیٹ کورٹ نے درست طور پر فیصلے کا جائزہ لیا تھا۔
کیس کا خلاصہ:
عمران شہزاد (درخواست گزار) نے 1999 میں انٹرمیڈیٹ کے امتحان میں انگریزی کے پرچے میں حصہ لیا۔ بعد ازاں یہ الزام لگایا گیا کہ امتحان میں اس کی جگہ کوئی اور شخص شریک ہوا تھا، جس پر جعلسازی کا الزام عائد کرتے ہوئے ایف آئی آر درج کی گئی اور بورڈ نے تادیبی کارروائی کا آغاز کیا۔ درخواست گزار کو چھ امتحانات کے لیے نااہل قرار دیا گیا اور اس کا سیکنڈری اسکول سرٹیفکیٹ منسوخ کر دیا گیا۔ درخواست گزار نے اس فیصلے کے خلاف عدالت میں مقدمہ دائر کیا، جو ٹرائل کورٹ نے منظور کر لیا۔
جواب:
بورڈ نے اپیل کی کہ درخواست گزار نے تادیبی کمیٹی کے سامنے پیش ہونے کے لیے نوٹسز کے باوجود شرکت نہیں کی، اس لیے اس کے خلاف غیر موجودگی میں کارروائی کی گئی اور اس کے خلاف فیصلہ کیا گیا۔
فیصلہ:
اپیلیٹ کورٹ نے بورڈ کی اپیل منظور کرتے ہوئے درخواست گزار کا مقدمہ مسترد کر دیا، جس کے بعد درخواست گزار نے سول ریویژن دائر کی۔ عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ تادیبی اور فوجداری کارروائیاں بیک وقت چل سکتی ہیں اور تادیبی کمیٹی کا فیصلہ درست تھا۔ عدالت نے اپیلیٹ کورٹ کے فیصلے کو برقرار رکھا اور سول ریویژن خارج کر دی۔
PLJ 2023 Lahore (Note) 141
Present: Ma s u d Ab i d Na q v i , J.
IMRAN SHAHZAD--Petitioner
versus
BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE & SECONDARY EDUCATION
GUJRANWALA through Chairman and 5 others--Respondents
C.R. No. 2069 of 2012, decided on 9.12.2019.
Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)--
----Ss. 42 & 54--Punjab Universities and Board of Intermediate Education
Act,
1950,
S.
3(1)--Intermediate
examination--Allegation
of
impersonation--Registration of FIR and disciplinary proceedings were
initiated
against
petitioner--Ex-parte
disciplinary
proceedings--
Disqualification for six examinations and quashment of secondary school
certificate result card--Suit for declaration--Decreed--Appeal--Allowed--
Challenge to--Although petitioner was acquitted of charge but he did not
appear before disciplinary committee despite issuance of notice,
consequently, ex-parte proceedings were conducted against him--Criminal
proceedings are not barred in presence of departmental proceedings and
that
departmental
and
criminal proceedings
can proceeded
simultaneously--The appellate Court has properly appreciated pleadings
and has also discussed in detail statements of PW’s and DW’s on basis of
documents exhibited by both sides while dilating upon controversy and
thereafter reached at conclusion regarding controversy--Neither any
misreading or non-reading of evidence on record nor any infirmity, legal
or factual, has been pointed out in impugned judgment and decree passed
by appellate Court--Revision petition dismissed. [Para 3 & 5] A, B
& C
2015 SCMR 1 ref.
Ch. Abdul Hamid, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Ali Masood Hayat, Advocate for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 9.12.2019.
Or d e r
Brief facts leading to the filing of instant civil revision are that
petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration with mandatory injunction with
the assertions that he appeared in English paper of intermediate examination
conducted by the respondents/defendants on 01.05.1999 under roll No.
80128, however, after the examination he came to know that FIR No.
333/2009 dated 05.05.1999 under Section 3(1) of the Punjab Universities and
Boards of Intermediate and Secondary Education Act. 1950 as amended vide
Ordinance-V of 1999 was registered against him at Police Station Satellite
Town Gujranwala on the allegation that in place of the petitioner some other
person appeared in the examination therefore he committed impersonation.
The respondents/defendants also initiated disciplinary proceedings against the
petitioner and he was disqualified for six examinations and the result card of
secondary school certificate of the petitioner/plaintiff was also cancelled.
Hence, the suit. The suit was contested by the defendants/respondents and out
of divergent pleadings of the parties, issues were framed by the learned Trial
Court and after recording evidence of the parties, the learned Trial Court vide
judgment dated 31.10.2011 decreed the suit. Feeling aggrieved,
defendants/respondents filed an appeal and learned Additional District Judge
vide judgment & decree dated 24.05.2012 accepted the appeal and dismissed
the suit. Being dissatisfied, the petitioner/plaintiff has filed the instant civil
revision and challenged the validity of the judgment and decree passed by the
learned appellate Court.
2. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and
perused the available record as well as have minutely gone through the
impugned judgment and decree.
3. The petitioner/plaintiff was proceeded against on the allegation
that some other person appeared in the English paper of intermediate
examination in place of petitioner/ plaintiff on the basis of fabricated roll
number, therefore petitioner committed impersonation. This fact is very much
clear from Exh.D.2/copy of center slip and Exh.D.3/ examination center slip
which show that photographs and serial number of the form including
attestation of these two documents are different. The petitioner/plaintiff
committed impersonation for which criminal case was got registered against
him under the Ordinance ibid and disciplinary proceedings were also initiated
against him. Although petitioner/plaintiff was acquitted of the charge but he
did not appear before the disciplinary committee despite issuance of notice,
consequently, ex-parte proceedings were conducted against him and
disciplinary committee disqualified the petitioner for six examinations and
also recommended for quashing the secondary school certificate vide order
dated 28.8.1999. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Appeal Committee
of BISE Gujranwala, however the same was dismissed vide order dated
18.12.1999. Thereafter, on the recommendation of disciplinary committee,
the result quashment committee on 22.12.2000 recommended quashment of
secondary school certificate of the petitioner and the Board in its meeting
held on 22.03.2001 approved the same, hence, secondary school certificate of
the petitioner was also cancelled. The plea raised by the petitioner that
criminal and disciplinary proceedings cannot proceed simultaneously is
misconceived because it is settled law that criminal proceedings are not
barred in presence of departmental proceedings and that departmental and
criminal proceedings can proceeded simultaneously. The learned appellate
Court has properly appreciated the pleadings and has also discussed in detail
statements of PW’s and DW’s on the basis of documents exhibited by both
sides while dilating upon the controversy and thereafter reached at the
conclusion regarding the controversy. Hence, the findings of learned
appellate Court are maintained/upheld.
4. With respect to interference in the findings of appellate Court
where there is inconsistency between the trial Court and appellate Court, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in a case reported as Amjad Ikram vs.
Mst. Asiya Kausar (2015 SCMR 1) held that:
“Even otherwise, in case of inconsistency between the learned and
the appellate Court, the latter must be given preference in the
absence of any cogent reason to the contrary, as has been held by
this Court in judgements reported as Madan Gopal and 4 other vs
Maran Bipari and 3 others (PLD 1969 SC 617 and Mohammad
Nawaz through LRS vs Haji Mohammad Baran Khan through LRS
and others (2013 SCMR 1300)
5. Neither any misreading or non-reading of evidence on record nor
any infirmity, legal or factual, has been pointed out in the impugned judgment
and decree passed by the learned appellate Court, therefore, this civil revision
is dismissed.
(Y.A.) Civil Revision dismissed
Comments
Post a Comment