| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLG 1523 1994 SLD 1523 = 1994 PLD 9 |
Writ Petition No.700 of 1993, decided on 28th August, 1993.
Before Mian Ghulam Ahmad, J
I.A. Sherwani etc. v. Government of Pakistan and others 1991 SCMR 1041 ref. Fazal Elahi Siddiqui for Petitioner. Muhammad Munir Piracha for
Respondents
MUHAMMAD ASADULLAH KHAN---Petitioner
VERSUS
CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCES, QUAID-E-AZAM UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD and 3 others---Respondents
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 25
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)---
----Art. 25---Quaid-e-Azam University Act (XXVIII of 1973), Ss. 28 & 29-- Quaid-e-Azam University Regulations, 1992, Regln. 4(b)---Equality of citizens ---Vires of Regln. 4(b), Quaid-e-Azam University Regulations, 1992, on the touchstone of Art. 25 of the Constitution---Invoking of Art. 25 of the Constitution ---Essentials---Quaid-e-Azam University Regulations, 1992 have been framed or amended by competent Authority in a regular or lawful manner---Presumption is always in favour of constitutionality of an enactment; burden will be upon the person who attacks the same to show that there has been infringement or transgression of Constitutional principles---Aggrieved person while invoking Art. 25 of the Constitution must make out that he has been treated differently from others similarly circumstanced without any reasonable basis---Legislature or a body framing certain rules must be presumed to understand and correctly appreciate the needs of its own people and it is aware of their problems, and endeavours to solve the same in the light of past experience and present day needs, taking care of general welfare and future orientation of that particular segment of society, falling within its domain---No case was made out to show as to how petitioner had been accorded any unequal, unfair or hostile treatment in the matter in question-- Petitioner could not establish that Quaid-e-Azam University Regulations or any part thereof, was a discriminatory or inhuman legislation, designed to perpetuate injustice to petitioner---Application of Regln. 4(b), Quaid-e-Azam University Regulations, 1992, or treatment meted out to petitioner was the same for all the students and petitioner had not been dealt with discriminately or arbitrarily; thus, he could not make out any grievance on that count---No interference in Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court was warranted-- Regulation 4(b), Quaid-e-Azam University Regulations, 1992 being a valid law was not ultra vires of Art. 25 of the Constitution: -[Vires of legislation].