| |  ISLAMABAD: Islamabad High Court (IHC) today disposed off Farah Dogar case. In its verdict, the court termed the reassessment and rechecking of Farah’s marks correct.
Earlier, Chief Justice IHC, Justice Sardar Muhammad Aslam Thursday reserved verdict in Farah Hameed Dogar case after completing the hearing of legal challenge to the jacking up of her marks in FSc annual examination.
IHC gave the verdict after thoroughly reviewing all relevant record of Farah Hameed Dogar which includes answer sheets, rechecking and reassessing of her marks.
During the final hearing of the issue before the IHC, petitioner Azam Khan Sultanpuri, who is one of the challengers of extra 21 marks awarded to Farah Hameed Dogar, argued that the Chairman, Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (FBISE) acted in gross violation of the rules while awarding extra marks to the daughter of CJP.
....
| Verdict in Farah Dogar case today |  | | |
Friday, January 16, 2009
By Faisal Kamal Pasha
ISLAMABAD: The chief justice of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) here on Thursday reserved judgment till Friday (today) in the additional marks case of Farah Hameed Dogar, the daughter of Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar.
Former attorney general of Pakistan Malik Muhammad Qayyum, while arguing the case, said that there were several examples he could quote where the students had applied for re-evaluation of their marks and that was done as per the court orders.
The IHC CJ, however, said that while there were several examples in this regard, these re-evaluations were done after the court issued the orders. The chief justice asked Malik Qayyum, the lawyer of Farah Dogar, whether or not the chairman FBISE had the authority to order re-evaluation/assessment of the papers. The former AG said that according to the Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (FBISE) Act 1975, the chairman FBISE had the powers of a chief executive and he could issue such orders as a court could.
It is a very common thing that if some student has reservations about the declared result, it is his right to apply for re-evaluation/assessment so that he could be satisfied, Malik Qayyum further said.
The IHC CJ himself examined the record and read out the answer to a question written by some student. The CJ told the lawyers that the examiner in this paper had given one mark to the student whereas the head examiner had given two marks to the student.
The lawyer of the former chairman Federal Board, Raja Abdur Rehman, said that marking of papers was a technical matter and only the concerned persons could do that. Barrister Jaffrey, while arguing before the court, said that in this case, the re-evaluation of papers had been done three times, first on September 12, then on September 13 and on September 15. How is it possible to do re-evaluation three times whereas it is written quite clearly on the back side of the application form for re-evaluation of papers that only rechecking or recounting of the marks would be done and not the re-evaluation/assessment?
The CJ told Barrister Jaffrey that the re-evaluation/assessment had not been done three times but was done only once.
Quoting from the answer of Malik Qayyum, Barrister Jaffrey said that Malik Qayyum had said that the FBISE chairman was the repository of all powers whereas “I can quote from his own judgments that nobody is repository of all powers”.
Rai Nawaz Kharal, another lawyer of Farah Hameed Dogar, along with Malik Muhammad Qayyum and Dr Khalid Ranjha, asked the court to take action on the publication of some secret documents in newspapers. Upon this, the CJ said: “It is you people who provide the media with these documents.”
He said Malik Qayyum would submit before the court some case of law in this regard and after seeing it “we will announce the decision tomorrow”.
After the proceedings of the case, Raja Abdur Rehman, while talking to the media outside the courtroom, said the group of lawyers, including Malik Qayyum and Dr Ranjha, had submitted about 15 judgments of courts before the IHC. The rule that has been written on the backside of the re-evaluation form is not the law but judgments of the superior court are the law, he added. There are examples where a student was awarded “0” mark and after he applied for re-evaluation of his paper, he scored most of all and stood at the top. “Where there is a wrong, there is a remedy. This decision is very important and it will be according to the law and the Constitution,” Raja said.
....
IHC issues detailed verdict in Farah Dogar case
Updated at: 1435 PST, Friday, January 16, 2009
ISLAMABAD: Islamabad High Court (IHC) today disposed off Farah Dogar case by terming the procedure of re-assessment and re-checking of Farah’s marks correct.
In its detailed 14 pages verdict, Justice Sardar Muhammad Aslam has stated that examiners did not make any mistake while re-evaluating Farah Hameed Dogar’s marks and that the history of higher courts was replete with verdicts allowing the reassessment of awarded marks.
The court also directed the government and ministry of education to determine a well-defined procedure of awarding additional marks and re-evaluation of marks awarded.
Earlier, Chief Justice IHC, Justice Sardar Muhammad Aslam had reserved verdict in Farah Hameed Dogar case after completing the hearing of legal challenge to the jacking up of her marks in FSc annual examination.
IHC gave the verdict after thoroughly reviewing all relevant record of Farah Hameed Dogar which includes answer sheets, rechecking and reassessing of her marks.
During the final hearing of the issue before the IHC, petitioner Azam Khan Sultanpuri, who is one of the challengers of extra 21 marks awarded to Farah Hameed Dogar, argued that the Chairman, Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (FBISE) acted in gross violation of the rules while awarding extra marks to the daughter of CJP.
....
|
For a background reading, please read:
Illegal admission of Mariam Nawaz Sharif
Chief Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar: An unsung hero |
No comments:
Post a Comment
1. You are very welcome to comment, more so if you do not agree with the opinion expressed through this post.
2. If you wish to hide your identity, post with a pseudonym but don't select the 'anonymous' option.
3. Copying the text of your comment may save you the trouble of re-writing if there is an error in posting.