February 2, 2003	Sunday	Ziqa’ad 29, 1423

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

PESHAWAR, Feb 1: A two-member bench of the Peshawar High Court has sought comments from the provincial government and the management of Iqra University, Karachi, on a writ petition challenging, among other things, the status of the varsity’s project director.

The bench directed the registrar in Karachi, and dean and project director of university in Peshawar, and the provincial education secretary to file comments within a fortnight.

The petition has been filed by a student, Asim Raheel Khan, stating that the Iqra University Ordinance, 2000, provided for establishment of Iqra University at Karachi and did not authorize any campus at Peshawar.

He stated that the ordinance did not allow the management to franchise the Iqra university like a commercial organization. He claimed that the ordinance also did not provide for an office of the project director.

He stated that in September 2000, applications were invited for admission to Masters in Information Technology programme in the Peshawar campus for which the petitioner applied. He said the university could not offer certain courses in time and he was forced to extend his studies to the seventh semester. He said he was made liable unnecessarily to pay an additional amount of Rs5,000 as miscellaneous charges for none of his fault.

The petitioner said he approached the project director on Dec 14 who, according to him, claimed that he had no time to meet him and during the course of arguments the director lost temper and pushed the petitioner. Through a notification, the petitioner stated, he was suspended by the project director.

The petitioner stated that on the advice of the disciplinary committee he submitted an apology on a stamp paper, but was informed that his name had been struck off the rolls for nonpayment of fee. The petitioner said he was told that he could not deposit the fee under the old structure that is Rs15,502, but in accordance with the new structure which said it was Rs38,000.

Counsel of the petitioner prayed the bench to allow the petitioner to pay the fee according to the old structure.