P L D 2010 Quetta 48
Before Qazi Fae z Isa, C J and Syeda Tahira Safdar, J
NOROZ KHAN ---Petitioner
Versus
SELECTION COMMITTEE through Chairman and others ---Respondents
Constitutional Petition No.86 of 2009, decided on 24th December, 2009.
Bolan Medical College Quetta Prospectus (20 08-2009) ---
----Para. 32 ---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199 ---Constitutional petition ---Educational
institutions ---Admission on reserved seat ---Special case ---Candidate was holding two
domicile certificates and failed to get one cancelled two yea rs before applying for admission,
therefore, he was not allowed admission in Medical College on reserved seat ---Plea raised by'
candidate was that he got one certificate cancelled before applying for admission ---Validity --
-Even if candidate had got one cer tificate cancelled, it would not entitle him to apply on
reserved seats of a particular district, as requirement of college in that regard was three fold;
firstly the local certificate of one district should have been cancelled, at least two years before
applying; secondly candidate was required to so inform Selection Committee at the time of
admission; and thirdly exercise of discretion by Committee was by way of special case and
not as of right ---As the stipulated two years period had not expired and Sele ction Committee
was not informed about the candidate holding two certificates, the exception by way of
"special case" provided in paragraph 32 of Bolan Medical College Quetta Prospectus, 2008 -
2009, was not attracted ---Selection Committee committed no illeg ality in rejecting
candidature of the candidate on reserved seat of district Gwadar ---High Court declined to
interfere in the decision made by Selection Committee ---Petition was dismissed in
circumstances.
Kishwar Rehman v. Government of Balochistan PL D 2001 Quetta 78 ref.
Muhammad Aslam Chishti for Petitioner.
Ghulam Mustafa Buzdar for Respondent No.3.
Rauf Atta for Respondent No.4.
Nasrullah Achakzai, Addl. A. -G. for the State.
ORDER
QAZI FAEZ ISA, C J .--- The petitioner applied for a dmission to Bolan Medical College
Quetta ("College") against one of the four reserved seats for District Gwadar to the MBBS
Programme in August, 2008 for the Academic Session 2008 -09. The petitioner stood at S.
No.4 as per the result of the Pre -Entry Test. The petitioner however was not given admission
on the reserved seat and as to respondent No.3 Miss Raeesa Aziz, who on the pre -entry test
having obtained 43.640 marks against 43.843 marks of the petitioner instead obtained
admission. The College came to t he conclusion that the petitioner was not entitled to get
admission on the reserved seat in terms of paragraph 32 of the College Prospectus 2008 -
2009, "(Prospectus"). Paragraph 32 of the Prospectus reads as under: ---
"A candidate or his/her father/mother /guardian as the case may be found in possession of two
or more local/domicile certificates issued by competent authority of different
Districts/Agencies in the time of applying for admission, shall not be considered for
admission against the seats of any District/Agencies for which he or she has applied. Such
cases can be considered as a special case only if he or she or the parents/guardian inform the
committee at the time of admission and that too have got cancellation of their certificates at
least two years before applying for admission in Bolan Medical College, Qeutta, if such cases
not mentioned at the time of admission will be de -seated without any notice and will not be
eligible for admission in future for at least three coming years. And he or she has no right to
appeal in any Court of law."
2. The Selection Committee determined in the light of paragraph 32 of the Prospectus that the
petitioner is not entitled to get admission on the reserved seat for District Gwadar. The
decision of the Selection Committee in this regard is reproduced as under: --
"The Selection Committee went through the report of EDO Revenue Gwadar dated
15-12-2008 Mr. Noroz Khan son of Abdullah of District Gwadue (Gwadar) at S. No.4
on merit list is holding in two locals at o ne time i.e. Local of Gwadar as well as Local
of Kech, therefore under clause 32 of the College Prospectus 2008 -09 his candidature
stand rejected against reserved seat of District Gwadar and the next eligible candidate
be admitted in Bolan Medical College, Quetta during the academic session 2008 -09."
3. Not being satisfied with the said decision the petitioner approached the Chief Minister of
Balochistan, who referred the matter for reconsideration by the Selection Committee.
However, the Selection Commit tee unanimously maintained its earlier decision the said
decision is reproduced as under: ---
"The Principal, BMC placed before the Selection Committee the case of Noroz Khan
son of Abdullah resident of District Gwadar on the direction of Honourable Chief
Minister as envisaged in his letter No.PS -CM/1 -1/2008/1781 dated 22 -1-2009. The
case was discussed by the Selection Committee and all the Members were of the
unanimous view that the previous decision of the Selection Committee stands correct
and rejected Mr. Noroz Khan son of Abdullah's candidature for admission according
to Para No.32 of the Prospectus 2008 -2009."
4. Being aggrieved by the decisions of the Selection Committee of the College the petitioner
filed the instant petition and sought the follow ing reliefs: ---
(i) declare that decision of Selection Committee rejecting candidature of petitioner
(originally as well as on reference from the Chief Minister) is illegal and without
lawful authority;
(ii) declare that Para 32 of the Prospectus is un reasonable and liable to be quashed;
(iii) as a consequence of the above declarations, admission of 3rd respondent in place
of petitioner was unlawful".
5. Mr. Muhammad Aslam Chishti, learned counsel for petitioner however did not address any
arguments on the alleged unreasonability of paragraph 32 of the Prospectus. He simply
maintained that paragraph 32 does not come in the way of the petitioner. In this regard
learned counsel stated that whilst admittedly the petitioner held Local Certificate of Dist rict
Kech but on his request the same was cancelled on 29 -8-2007 and on the day the petitioner
submitted his application he held only one Local Certificate that of District Gwadar.
6. On the other hand Mr. Ghulam Mustafa Buzdar, learned counsel for the p rivate respondent
Miss Raeesa Aziz opposed the petition on the following grounds: ---
(i) The application, submitted by the petitioner to the Executive District Officer
(Revenue) District Kech for cancellation of the petitioner's Local Certificate, stated
that the petitioner intended to move to District Gwadar;
(ii) That the petition was based on mala fides as Local Certificate was obtained simply
for obtaining admission;
(iii) Petitioner concealed the facts that he held two Local Certificates and even if the
Local Certificate in respect of District Kech was cancelled on 28 -9-2007 the petitioner
was required to disclose the same in terms of paragraph 32 of the Prospectus;
(iv) The second sentence of paragraph 32 of the Prospectus created an exception, but
the same was not attracted to the case of petitioner since the cancellation of District
Kech Certificate was required to have been cancelled at least two years prior to
applying for admission;
(v) Paragraph 32 of the Prospectus provided for penal co nsequences if disclosure was
not made and as such the provisions thereof were mandatory; and
(vi) The Chief Minister had no authority to require the Selection Committee to re -
consider its earlier decision;
7. He also placed reliance on the case of Kish war Rehman v. Government of Balochistan,
PLD 2001 Quetta 78. The Division Bench of this Court in that -case had held that;
"Object of reserved seats for various districts in professional college appears to give
legal protection to the students of backward area in order to bring them at par with the
developed area of the country. This departure from merits has a Constitutional protection
in case of educational institutions financed by the Government. So, this object would
certainly be defeated if the studen ts who are not permanent/genuine residents of the
district, manage the certificates and get admission."
8. Mr. Nasrullah Achakzai, learned Additional Advocate -General, supported and adopted the
arguments of Mr. Ghulam Mustafa Buzdar, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
9. Admittedly in August, 2008, when the petitioner applied to the College for admission, he as
per his own showing had held a local certificate of District Kech. The local certificate of District
was got cancelled on 29 -8-2007, whilst th e local certificate of District Gwadar annexed with the
petition is dated 17 -2-2007. Accordingly, it is clear that the petitioner held two local certificates
to two different districts for the period 17 -2-2007 till 29 -8-2007. Even if the petitioner had got
one certificate cancelled it would not entitle him to apply on the reserved seats of a particular
district, since the requirement of the College in this regard was three fold; Firstly the local
certificate of one district should have been cancelled, "at l east two years before applying",
secondly, the petitioner was required to so "inform the Committee at the time of admission" and,
thirdly, the exercise of the discretion by the Committee was by way of `special case' and not as of
right. Therefore, since th e stipulated two years had not expired and the Committee had not been
informed about the petitioner holding two certificates, the exception by way of `special case'
provided in paragraph 32 of the Prospectus was not attracted. The Selection Committee in
rejecting the candidature of the petitioner on the reserved seat of District Gwadar, therefore,
committed no illegality. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed, but no order as to cost.
M.H./17/Q Petition dismissed.This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.