HYDERABAD, Nov 22: Sindh High Court Hyderabad circuit bench here on Friday has issued notices to Mehran University of Engineering and Technology vice-chancellor, civil and mechanical engineering departments chairmen, faculty of engineering dean and controller of examinations, on a petition of four students, requesting the court to direct the MUET to issue them degrees or allow them to appear in supplementary examination.

Ayaz Latif Palijo advocate represented the petitioners including Shafqat Ali, Jan Mohammad Mirjat, Azeem Mohammad and Jamil Ahmed.

According to their case, Ali was appointed as sub-engineer in Wapda in 1990 and posted in Lakhra power project Jamshoro in 1991. He is currently posted in Nawabshah circle.

Mirjat is working in irrigation department for several years, while Mohammad is under training for senior clerk in Benazir Bhutto Shaheed Youth Development Programme in works and services department and Ahmed is unemployed. They got admissions in MUET –I- civil and mechanical departments in 1992-1995 batches.

Ali was already in job and attending regular classes after taking long leave without pay, granted to him by the project director Lakhra project. He passed his first and second year but he was called back by Lakhra in 2000 and was informed that he had been transferred to Quetta and he went there and could not attend few classes. Final year’s examination of 1993 batch were to be held in 1997 but were mysteriously held in 2000 while he had already been transferred.

The petitioners said that they appeared in extra supplementary examinations of ‘91 to ‘94 batches for 1st term to 4th term in December 2004 and for 5th term to 8th term in January 2005 for final degree. They said that since Ali was transferred to Quetta, he could not show required attendance so sectional marks could not be obtained to pass out examinations.

The VC and Controller deliberately failed Azeem Mohammad and Jamil Ahmed of 94 and 95 batches. They said that they were ready to appear in examination again and submitted application to VC, seeking grace marks for saving their future but in vain and it was in spite of the fact that such precedents were set as university gave grace marks or an opportunity following VC’s approval.

They said that respondents issued any degrees with such kind of results of students who were influential like Azhar Kandhar of 92 batch - a failure student - but since he was brother of Sarwar Kandhar, therefore, he was awarded final degree. Another student of 93 batch was awarded degree because he was son of retired Justice and the same is mentioned in academic council 2005 agenda copy, they said. They maintained that they had informed the controller that they want rechecking of copies as they were dissatisfied with result. They said that no action was taken to date and they were still deprived of their final degrees while their copies were not re-checked.

They said that by issuing final degrees to students in identical cases of the same batches and denying petitioners is discrimination. They said that act of respondents is malafide and without lawful authority. They prayed the court to direct the respondents to adopt uniform impartial policy for all students and to issue final degree to petitioners as other students of the same batches were awarded degrees with same result or they be allowed to appear in examination. They said that respondents should be directed to take step for re-checking of selected papers of the petitioners or to give permission to them to appear in special supplementary examinations for same papers. The case is fixed for December 17.