Mehmoona Rashid Vs Women Medical College

JUDGMENT SHEET

IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT,

ABBOTTABAD BENCH.

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

W.P No. 1147-A of 2015

JUDGMENT

Date of hearing................17.02.2016.............................

Petitioner(s)...(Mehmoona Rashid) by Mr.Yasir Zahoor Abbasi, Advocate.

Respondent (s)...(Women Medical Coallege etc) by M/S Niaz Khan Jadoon and Asad Tanveer Qaureshi, Advocates.

QALANDAR ALI KHAN, J:- Mehmoona Rashid, petitioner, is aggrieved of withholding of her result of one paper i.e. medicine in final MBBS examination held in 2013, and is seeking a direction to the respondent i.e. Khyber Medical University, Peshawar, through Controller of examination, KPK, Peshawar (respondent No.2) to announce her result of final year forthwith.

2.The perusal of writ petition would reveal that having secured admission in Women Medical

College in the year 2007, the petitioner appeared and cleared examinations of 1st year, 2nd year and 3rd year MBBS, but she remained unsuccessful in 4th year (3rd Profession) in one paper i.e. special pathology and also failed to clear the subject of medicine in final year. Anyhow, in pursuance of a Civil Court order, she appeared and cleared the paper of special pathology. Later on, she also appeared in one paper of medicine in final year but her result is not being declared; hence the instant writ petition with the above stated prayer.

3.In compliance with the Court notice, Mr.

Niaz Khan Jadoon, Advocate, appeared on behalf of Women Medical College, Abbottabad (respondent No.1), while Mr. Asad Tanveer Qureshi, Advocate, appeared for respondent No.2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondents were heard, and record perused.

4.The learned Counsel for respondent No.2 defended withholding of result of final year MBBS of the petitioner, mainly, on the ground that

she had appeared in the MBBS final prof.

examination, besides other MBBS Professional examinations under Court orders, and the result was withheld as her Roll Number was cancelled because her suit was dismissed as withdrawn. The learned counsel also referred to the judgments of this Court and other superior Courts in the Country in support of his contention that a student could neither be allowed more than four prescribed chances in one Professional examination nor he/she can appear in the next higher professional examination unless he/she cleared his/her previous year professional examination.

5.However, the instant case is

distinguishable from the cases cited at the bar, simply because in this case neither question of more than prescribed chances is involved nor appearance of candidate in the next higher professional examination is in question before this Court, and the only issue for adjudication before the Court is whether the University could withhold

result of the final year MBBS of the petitioner after allowing her to appear in the examination, notwithstanding the fact that the permission was granted in compliance with the Court order. The learned counsel for respondent was unable to show us that provision under which a University is authorized/empowered to withhold result after a candidate has been allowed to appear in the examination, especially when the result withheld is with regard to only one paper and that too of the final year MBBS.

6.In short, there appears no justification on the part of the respondent to withhold result of the petitioner of final year MBBS. Therefore, on the acceptance of the writ petition, respondent No.2 is directed to announce result of final year MBBS of the petitioner without further loss of time.

Announced:

17.02.2016 JUDGE

JUDGE