Law:

Section:

(a)    Educational institution---

----Examinations---Result, quashing of---Chairman---Powers-Student/candidate (Plaintiff) who appeared and passed Matriculation examination filed a suit challenged quashing of his result vide two letters ('impugned letters') issued by the Disciplinary Committee of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Faisalabad (BISE Faisalabad )---Trial Court dismissed suit of the plaintiff/ student---Appellate / District Court setaside judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court declaring the impugned letters null and void on basis that proceedings of Disciplinary Committee were not as per law, however, referred the matter to same (Disciplinary Committee ) and directed that inquiry against the student / candidate would be pending and was to be carried out in accordance with law---Validity---It was not disputed that petitioner's (student's) result was notified in 1997 , however, the provisions of R.18 of Chapter V of Faisalabad BISE's Calendar clearly stipulated that power to quash vested in the Chairman, but the respondent-Board had placed on the record no such order ( i.e. order to said effect having been passed by the Chairman)---Even the document exhibited by respondent, (defendant /Board), through which petitioner / plaintiff was eventually intimated about dismissal of his appeal had not been issued by the Chairman---When a thing is to be done in a manner provided under law, the same should be done in that manner and not otherwise---Thus, the Appellate / District Court erred in law as well as facts of the case while passing the impugned portion of judgment of remand resulting in miscarriage of justice ---High Court set-aside the impugned portion of judgment and decree passed by the Appellate Court, consequent whereof , the suit instituted by the petitioner stood decreed as prayed for---Revision was allowed, in circumstances.

Secretary Ministry of Finance, Finance Division, Government of Pakistan and others v. Muhammad Anwar 2025 SCMR 153; Commissioner Inland Revenue, Large Taxpayers Office, Islamabad v. Pakistan Oil Fields Ltd., Rawalpindi and others 2024 SCMR 853 and Nadir Khan v. Qadir Hussain and others 2024 SCMR 770 ref.