IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH

CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA.

 

Present:

Irshad Ali Shah,J.

Agha Faisal, J.

 

CP D 07 of 2022                  :           Aman Mangrio vs.

                                                            Chairman BISE Larkana &Others

 

For the Petitioner                 :           Mr. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro, Advocate

                       

Date of hearing                    :           11.01.2022

 

Date of announcement      :           11.01.2022

 

 

ORDER

 

 

Agha Faisal, J.         1. Granted. 2. Deferred. 3. Granted, subject to all exceptions. 4. Present petition seeks cancellation of marks certificates issued to all students, having appeared in HSC-II Annual Examination held in July, 2021, and further seeks directions to the Board of Examinations to issue marks sheets in accordance with the demarcateddesire of the petitioner.

 

2.         At the very outset, learned counsel was confronted with respect to the maintainability hereof and queriedas to whether he needed time to address the Court in such regard. Learned counsel abjured the opportunity offered and elected to argue on maintainability today, however, remained unable to satisfy this Court in such regard.

 

3.         It is pertinent to observe that while the petitioner seeks cancellation of marks certificates awarded to students, however, none of the said persons have been arrayed as respondents. Such practice does not meet with the appreciation of this Court.

 

4.         It is apparent from the pleadings that the petitioner has taken no efforts to agitate the grievance before the concerned fora and has approached this Court directly. Article 199 of the Constitution contemplates the discretionary writ jurisdiction of this Court and the said discretion may be exercised in the absence of an adequate remedy. In the present matter admittedly no alternate remedy has ever even been invoked.

 

4.         The entire premise of the petitioner's is based upon disputed questions of fact, requiring detailed factual inquiry, investigation and / or evidence. It is settled law that the adjudication of disputed questions of fact, requiring evidence etc., is not amenable in the exercise of writ jurisdiction[1].

 

5.         In view hereof, we are constrained to observe that in the lis before us the petitioner’s counsel has been unable to set forth a case for the invocation of the discretionary[2] writ jurisdiction of this Court, hence, the listed petition is hereby dismissedin limine.

 

 

 

                                                                                    JUDGE

 

JUDGE

                                                           

 

 



[1]2016 CLC 1; 2015 PLC 45; 2015 CLD 257; 2011 SCMR 1990; 2001 SCMR 574; PLD 2001 Supreme Court 415;

[2]Per Ijaz Ul Ahsan J. in Syed Iqbal Hussain Shah Gillani vs. PBC & Others reported as 2021 SCMR 425; Muhammad Fiaz Khan vs. Ajmer Khan & Another reported as 2010 SCMR 105.