Dr. Akbar Anjum vs Bahauddin Zakariya University Sched — 2024 MLD 1410 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Dr. Akbar Anjum VS Bahauddin Zakariya University Sched., Clause 2(2)---Dean, appointment of---Candidate with highest marks not appointed---Respondent challenged appointment orders of respondent as Dean, while ignoring the petitioner who admittedly scored higher marks than respondent---Validity---Appointment of respondent No.6 had to be seen within the parameters of settled jurisprudence with regards to exercise of such discretion vested in competent authority under clause 2(2) of the Sched. to Baha-ud-din Zakariya University Act, 1975---Such provisions of law vested discretion in the competent authority to appoint Dean of the faculty amongst the three senior most professors of the faculty---Such wide-ranging discretion to appoint the Dean from amongst the three senior most professors had been structured through evaluation process---Admitted position was that such evaluation was carried out by the respondent university, through the pro forma duly issued by the office of the competent authority, vide letter dated 29.12.2008, to all public sector universities in the Province of Punjab, for appointment of the Deans of the faculties in the said universities whereby marks were awarded to all the three candidates based upon requisite qualification/qualities envisaged thereunder---Purpose of the said letter as well as the pro forma was self-explanatory inasmuch it clearly aimed at making the process of selection of the Dean in a transparent manner and it was based on the said pro forma that the respondent university, vide letter dated 18.03.2019, invited application for the appointment of the Dean of the faculty---Through the said pro forma, the evaluation of all the three candidates was carried out and the candidates were accorded marks respectively---Criteria envisaged through the pro forma followed by allocation and award of marks on the basis of such pro forma was not disputed by any of the parties---As a result, the petitioner was awarded highest marks i.e., 86 whereas the respondents Nos. 5 and 6 obtained 70 and 84 marks respectively, however, admittedly, the competent authority appointed respondent No. 6 without assigning any reason to demonstrate what prevailed with the competent authority to prefer respondent No.6 over the petitioner who had obtained highest marks as per the evaluation parameters envisaged and settled by issuance of the pro forma---Admittedly, the appointment of respondent No. 6 in place of the petitioner had been made without assigning any reason---While the comments were totally silent in that regard, the reason put forth by the respondent university that the difference in number between the petitioner and respondent No.6 was negligible and hence no reasoning was given, was an inexplicable and unconvincing argument---Discretion of the competent authority in the instant case was protected by High Court, however, the same had to be exercised in a structured manner and once candidates had been awarded marks pursuant to an undisputed evaluation process, the appointment of any candidate other than one a top of score table had to be through cogent reasons---Petition was partly allowed by setting aside impugned notification and competent Authority was directed to proceed in accordance with law---Petition was disposed of accordingly.

Dr. Akbar Anjum vs Bahauddin Zakariya University Sched — 2024 MLD 1410 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 MLD