Quota for employees' children: Court seeks replies in NED admissions policy case

Petition challenges increase in minimum passing percentage from 40% to 50%.


Our Correspondent January 10, 2015
Advocate Iqbal argued that the admissions committee is not competent and legally empowered to introduce any scheme without approval by the syndicate. PHOTO: EXPRESS

KARACHI: NED University of Engineering and Technology's vice-chancellor, its academic council heads and the admissions committee have to explain to the court by January 22 the changes in the new admissions policy for employees' children.

A Sindh High Court division bench, comprising justices Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Shahab Sarki, was hearing the matter on Friday in a petition filed by an NED employee, Muhammad Athar Ali.

Ali had taken the NED administration to the high court for allegedly taking back the relaxation of obtaining 40% marks in pre-admission entry tests for the employees' children. His daughter, Maira Fatima, appeared in the entry tests held by the university for 2014-15 sessions and successfully passed it by clinching 40% marks. The student was later informed that she was not eligible for admission as the minimum marks had been revised and increased to 50%.

His lawyer, Azra Iqbal, informed the judges that the NED had introduced the pre-admission entry test policy for the children of its employees and set the minimum qualifying marks at 36%, as mentioned in the prospectus. Later, the benchmark was increased to 40% in 2012-13.

But the university's admissions committee issued on October 25, 2014, the prospectus for 2015 sessions and declared that an applicant shall have to pass the entry test with at least 50% marks. "This policy has taken away the relaxation for the children of the varsity's employees," the lawyer said.

Advocate Iqbal argued that the admissions committee is not competent and legally empowered to introduce any scheme without approval by the syndicate.

Therefore, the new condition of obtaining 50% qualifying marks may be declared illegal and against the statute, she pleaded.

After the initial hearing, the bench members issued notices to the respondents and the provincial law officer to file their comments by January 22.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 11th, 2015.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ