AYESHA BATOOL vs JOINT ADMISSION COMMITTEE FOR ADMISSION IN MEDICAL COLLEGES OF AJ&K art

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

AYESHA BATOOL VS JOINT ADMISSION COMMITTEE FOR ADMISSION IN MEDICAL COLLEGES OF AJ&K art. 44---Educational institution---Policy discipline and other academic affairs---Judicial review---Scope---Writ petition under art. 44 of the Interim Constitution, 1974, cannot be entertained quo judicial review of the matter relating to policy discipline and other academic affairs of educational institutions unless: (i) any gross violation of law/regulations is pointed out and is oozing from the record; (ii) Proceedings ex-facie militate against the constitutionally fundamental guaranteed rights. Citation Name: 2025 CLC 1990 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case AYESHA BATOOL VS JOINT ADMISSION COMMITTEE FOR ADMISSION IN MEDICAL COLLEGES OF AJ&K art. 44---Educational institution---admission in MBBS---Online applying, requirement of---Policy making by the Pakistan Medical Commission---Scope---Invoking writ jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---Petitioner by filing the instant constitutional petition is seeking direction against the respondents (Pakistan Medical Commission) to consider her for admission in MBBS for Sessions 2023-24 against the seats reserved for refugees of 1947 settled in Pakistan---Record revealed that total 1421 candidates applied but the petitioner failed to apply within due date, and the Committee prepared merit list of the successful candidates---Pakistan Medical Commission issued direction to reopen the admission portal only for those candidates who have appeared in re-conduct of MDCaT 2023 in KPK and Sindh and include those candidates who passed the re-conduct MDCaT only and in said regard a public notice was issued by the Joint admission Committee to apply the re-conduct MDCaT candidates only according to the UHS but the petitioner did not appear in re-conduct MDCaT and applied only against the re-conduct MDCaT category---as per Policy of Pakistan Medical Commission and according to relevant Conditions [No. 3(a) and 5(v)] of the advertisement all the admission process will be made through online portal for transparency---Courts are required to exercise utmost restraint in matters relating to policies, disciplines and other academic affairs of educational institutions---Refusing to interference is a rule and deviation therefrom is an exception which can only be justified on the basis of clear and undisputed violation of the law---The reluctance of the Courts to interfere with academic affairs is based on the foundational principle that the academicians and educational institutions are the best judges because formulating policies and eligibility criteria falls within their exclusive domain---The standards prescribed and set out in the regulations relating to academic bodies, determination of eligibility to pursue studies and other related policies are not generally open to judicial review unless they can be clearly shown to contravene the law or to be shockingly unreasonable or perverse---Courts are not equipped nor have the capacity to deal with academic matters, let alone substituting opinions formed by the experts or professionals---Courts of law are under legal obligations to implement the laws holding the field and decide the disputes in line with the scheme of law---How could the University be blamed for the delayed approach of the petitioner and laziness exhibited---Law helps vigilant not indolent---In order to make the admission process fair and transparent, the respondent / Joint admission Committee made the process online and it was the responsibility of the petitioner to complete the admission process well in time as per instruction given by the Committee but the petitioner failed to process the application in the given time, whereas, 1421 other candidates applied for the admission and completed their admission process duly in accordance with the schedule given in the advertisement---Petitioner neither completed her application in time nor appeared in the re-conduct MDCaT but she applied only against the re-conduct MDCaT category which was contrary to law and against the rights of the other successful candidates---Furthermore, no plausible explanation or reason had been given by the petitioner for not completing the online admission process in time, however, when she failed to fulfill the requisite criteria given in the advertisement, she filed the present petition just to linger on the admission process of the qualified candidates---Writ petition, being not maintainable, was dismissed, in circumstances.

AYESHA BATOOL vs JOINT ADMISSION COMMITTEE FOR ADMISSION IN MEDICAL COLLEGES OF AJ&K art — 2025 CLC 1990 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC