ISLAMABAD: President Dr Arif Alvi has expressed displeasure over the delay by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) for not attesting the degree of a former student on flimsy grounds and upheld the orders of the Wafaqi Mohtasib directing the HEC to attest her degree within seven days.
The president also directed to initiate an inquiry against the delinquent official responsible for wasting precious months of the student.
The president gave these directions while rejecting a representation filed by HEC against a decision of the Wafaqi Mohtasib directing it to attest a female student’s BA degree within seven days.
As per details, Savera Afridi (the complainant) had applied to HEC for attestation of her BA degree and DMC but she was informed that since the session of her degree was 2020 it could not be attested as HEC had phased out two-year conventional BA/BSc programme and the universities were not allowed to enrol students in conventional BA/BSc programme after the academic year 2019.
Feeling aggrieved, the complainant approached the Wafaqi Mohtasib who passed the orders in her favour.The HEC then filed a representation as well as a review petition with the Mohtasib, which were rejected. Later, the HEC filed a representation against the orders of the Mohtasib with the president.
The president held personal hearing of the case and rejected HEC’s representation. He observed that the complainant was given admission by the University of Peshawar for the session 2019-2020 and the complainant had produced a letter of the University dated 01.09.2022 which showed that the complainant’s session for her BA degree was 2019-2020 and she was given admission in January 2020.
He added that since the complainant was given admission by the university for the session 2019-2020, therefore, there was no fault on the part of the complainant and she should not suffer for the acts and omissions of the university if it had violated HEC’s policy by allowing registrations for such session.
He stated that Wafaqi Mohtasib had rightly observed that it was HEC’s responsibility as a regulator to see as to whether its decisions were being implemented by the universities and any lapse on its part amounted to failure to perform its statutory obligations.
The president held that a student should not suffer because of the inaction of HEC or the university. He regretted the HEC, instead of taking any action against the university, had put the complainant into unnecessary ordeal without any fault on her part and was not attesting her degree.
The president, therefore, rejected the representation of HEC with the observation that HEC should censure the universities which were not following its guidelines or instructions so that in future the students should not suffer because of its inaction.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2023
Comments
Comments are closed.