Law: National University of Modern Languages (NUML) Examination Rules, 2018

Section: 5.31

 National University of Modern Languages (NUML) Examination Rules, 2018-

--

----R.5.31---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Educational institution---Award of M.Phil Degree instead of Ph.D Degree---Non-adherence to statutory Rules/Regulations---Interference by High Court---Scope---Non-completion of thesis of Ph.D Degree by the petitioner within prescribed time as required under Reglns.5.3 and 5.14(i) of Regulations of Examinations, 2001 (Regulations)--- Petitioner attributed delay in completing the thesis to the respondent-University on account of not determining the topic and not appointing the supervisor--- Contention of respondent University was that petitioner did not adhere to that statutory requirements of R. 5.31 of Examination Rules, 2018 (Rules) and did not submit re-defence of Ph.D. thesis before the Thesis Defence Committee (TDC) within time, thus Review Committee issued M.Phil Degree instead of Ph.D. Degree---Contention of the petitioner was that instead of giving him opportunity to re-appear before the TDC the letter of award of M.Phil Degree had been issued---Validity---Petitioner's defence that NUML had delayed the approval in the change of petitioner's topic for Ph.D thesis, was not tenable for the reason that he could not point out any provision of the Regulations, which required such changes to be approved by NUML---Petitioner did not submit his thesis for a re- defence before TDC within the deadline given by TDC, which caused NUML to decide not to issue him a Ph.D. Degree---Regulation 5.3 in Chapter-5 of the Regulations provided that the "total duration of Ph.D. Program is 3-8 years."--- Contesting parties in unison submitted that Regln. 5.3 had been part of the Regulations right from the time when the same are approved by the Board of Governors of NUML---High Court cannot re-write Regulations of an educational institution which are approved by its Board of Governors---High Court, in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction, could also not give to the petitioner an exemption from the applicability of any of the said Regulations---If High Court was to issue a writ of mandamus directing NUML to permit the petitioner to submit his re-defence it would not be without violence to Regln. 5.3 ibid---High Court could not substitute its own opinion for that of NUML contained in the letter, because such like educational matters were best left to elite members of faculty, who possessed technical expertise and experience of actual day to day