HAFSA HABIB QURESHI vs AMIR HAMZA Ss — 2024 PLD 780 SUPREME-COURT

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

HAFSA HABIB QURESHI VS AMIR HAMZA Ss. 3, 9(2)(f), 17(1) & 47---General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S.21---Medical College Admission Test ("MDCAT")---Allegations of cheating---Retake of test on orders of the Provincial Cabinet---Legality---Province alone is responsible for conducting a single admission test/MDCAT in their respective province but on the dates approved by the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council ("Council") and subject to the procedure/formalities provided under the Medical and Dental Undergraduate Education (Admissions, Curriculum and Conduct) Policy and Regulations 2023 ("Regulations")---Pakistan Medical and Dental Council Act, 2022 ("Act") or the Regulations do not offer any mechanisms for addressing unforeseen situations, like the present one where allegations were made of cheating by students during the MDCAT using modern devices---Consequently, in the absence of any specific laws, rules, or regulations, the provincial government has the competence to cancel and/or retake the MDCAT in terms of section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, as rightly held by the High Court in the impugned judgment---Retake of the MDCAT is a necessary measure to rectify the damage caused by the cheating scandal and to ensure that only qualified and deserving candidates enter the medical profession---It is understandable that some candidates who performed legitimately in the MDCAT 2023 may feel aggrieved by the decision to retake the tests, however, it is important to emphasize that the greater good lies in maintaining the integrity of the medical profession---Competent and deserving candidates should view the retake of the MDCAT as an opportunity to reaffirm their capabilities---In the present case the High Court did not interfere in any affairs of the educational institution, instead, it upheld the decision of the provincial government to retake the MDCAT, as the government is fully competent to conduct including the retake of the said test, in accordance with Section 17 of the Act---Petitions were dismissed and leave was refused. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 780 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case HAFSA HABIB QURESHI VS AMIR HAMZA art. 199---Suo motu powers of the High Court---Scope---High Court cannot exercise suo motu jurisdiction under article 199 of the Constitution. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 780 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case HAFSA HABIB QURESHI VS AMIR HAMZA art. 199---Educational institutions---Policies and internal affairs---Non-interference by Courts---Scope---Educational institutions occupy a special niche in our society which provides them a substantial right of "educational autonomy," within which public higher educational institutions are insulated from legal intrusion---Within that autonomous realm, educational institutions are entitled to deference when making academic decisions related to their educational mission---Thus, any interference by Courts of law with orders passed by educational institutions in the interest of the maintenance of discipline would defeat the very purpose for which these institutions exist or it would stultify the powers of the authorities/in charge of educational institutions or prevent them from taking any action against students' misconduct---Universities and educational institutions generally are armed with abundant powers of disciplinary action against recalcitrant students and the Courts are, in no way, minded to deprive them of their powers---While there exists a general principle of judicial restraint, implying that courts should be cautious in intervening in the internal matters of educational institutions, it is not an absolute ban---This restraint is exercised with prudence, and courts may step in when university authorities exceed the defined scope of their authority or act in violation of the statutes---In such cases, the courts play a crucial role in upholding legal standards and ensuring that educational institutions operate within the bounds of the law---Delicate balance between non-interference and necessary intervention is maintained to safeguard the integrity of academic institutions while also holding them accountable to legal frameworks. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 780 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case HAFSA HABIB QURESHI VS AMIR HAMZA Objection regarding the jurisdiction of a court is of a serious nature and demands careful consideration---It is incumbent upon such a court to give due attention to this objection, diligently examine the relevant legal provisions and precedents, and arrive at a well reasoned decision regarding the maintainability of any dispute before it. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 780 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case HAFSA HABIB QURESHI VS AMIR HAMZA art. 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---High Court has the power to convert and treat one type of proceeding into another type---after doing so, it can proceed to decide the matter itself, provided it has jurisdiction over the issue, or it may remit the matter to the competent authority, forum, or court for a decision on its merits.

HAFSA HABIB QURESHI vs AMIR HAMZA Ss — 2024 PLD 780 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD