RAJA FAYYAZ AHMED, C.J.---Following reliefs have been claimed in this Constitutional petition:- "(a) That the decision of the Selection Committee, whereby the admission has been declined to the petitioner, is illegal, void, discriminatory and in excess of authority and of no legal effect.
(b) That the petitioner being eligible in all respect is entitled to admission in 1st year M.B.,B.S. Bolan Medical College Session 2002-2003 and the official respondents be directed to grant admission to the petitioner, accordingly. '
(c) Any other order as may be deemed fit and appropriate in the circumstances of the case may also be awarded in the interest of justice."
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner and respondent No,4 besides other candidates applied for admission in the first year M.B.,B.S. Class of Bolan Medical College, Quetta, Academic Session 2002-2003, against six seats reserved for District Khuzdar on merit basis. The petitioner and the respondent No,4 appeared in the entry test alongwith the other candidates and as per merit list assigned by the college authorities the petitioner was placed at Serial No,4 of the merit list, whereas; the respondent No,4 (Miss Khalida Usman) was at Serial No,7 of the merit list filed as Annexure-A to the Constitutional petition. Vide advertisement published in the 'Daily Jang', Quetta
(Urdu) dated 27-6-2003 issued by the Principal, Bolan Medical College, Quetta the candidates from District Khuzdar were informed about the date of interview to be held in the office of DCO, Khuzdar on 14-7-2003 at 9-30 a.m. By the Selection Committee and that the Selection Committee will hold its meeting for the final selection of the candidates in the DCO's Office Quetta on 21-7-2003 (Monday) at 10-00 a.m. Also, as per note inserted/appended below the advertisement, all the candidates were informed that they should bring along their original testimonials including the acknowledgment receipt.
3. The case of the petitioner as set up in the Constitutional petition is that she fell sick and remained admitted in the WAPDA Hospital from 11-7-2003 to 13-7-2003, and; on 14-7-2003 when she alongwith her father reported at Khuzdar for verification of documents, they were informed that interview has already been conducted on 12-7-2003 and she was further informed by the authorities of the Selection Committee that the change in the date of interview was notified on 4- 7-2003, but on account of eruption of law and order situation, curfew was imposed therefore, she had no chance to read the newspaper of the said date and remained ignorant of the same, whereas; her father remained hospitalized from 20-7-2003 to 21-7-2003 in Akram Hospital, Quetta.
However; the petitioner stated to have reported in the final proceedings of the Selection Committee on 21-7-2003 and submitted application dated 14-7-2003 to the official of the Bolan Medical College, but was not allowed to appear before the Selection Committee to clarify her position and she was informed that her application has already been rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner claims to have made a representation through an application dated 28-7-2003. It has been contended in the petition that the Selection Committee in its meeting held on 21-8- 2003 considered the application filed by her father, but the same was rejected on the ground that she should have informed to the Selection Committee, which omitted to take note of the fact that there was a change in the interview date.
4. Photostat copy of the publication about the change in the date of interview for districts Kalat, Khuzdar, Kharan, Lasbela, Mastung and Awaran for admission in the first year M.B.,B.S. Class of Bolan Medical College and first year B.D.S Course, as notified by the Principal, Bolan Medical College was published in 'Daily Jang', Quetta on 4-7-2003 for the information of the candidates of these districts that interviews for the Academic Session 2002-2003 will be scheduled to be held on 14-7-2003, instead; will be held on 12-7-2003 at 9-30 a.m. In the office of DCO, Khuzdar and the candidates were required to bring their along original testimonials.
5. The Selection Committee, Bolan Medical College admittedly assembled in the DCO's Office, Khuzdar- on 12-7-2003 at 9-30 a.m. Which interviewed the candidates, who appeared before it and final meeting of the Selection Committee as it appears from the copy of the minutes of the meeting annexed with the memo. Of Constitutional petition was held at Quetta on 21-7-2003 in the DCO's Office, Quetta for the Academic Session 2002-2003 in which the application of the petitioner for admission was rejected after recording its findings/decision as under:-- "KHUZDAR Miss Nadia Mehreen Baloch d/o Abdul Rauf. She failed to appear before the Selection Committee for interview on 12-7-2003 at Khuzdar and she did not submit any application for her absence. The Selection Committee waited for her -to appear for the interview and later directed the D.C.O..
Khuzdar that if she comes or submit an application on the same day, it should be forwarded to the Committee. She was absent during the interview and did not submit any application on the day of interview at Khuzdar. Hence her application is rejected by the Selection Committee under para. No,49 of the Prospectus for the Academic Session 2002-2003."
6. Copy of the minutes of meeting of the Selection Committee held in the Office of the Chairman, Balochistan Public Service Commission, Quetta on 21-8-2003 has also been filed with the memo. Of Constitutional petition, which indicates that the Selection Committee deliberated upon the cases of a few candidates including that of the petitioner in respect whereof application dated 28-7- 2003 was moved to the Chairman, Selection Committee by the father of the petitioner was brought under consideration in which the decision earlier taken by the Selection Committee, noted above, was maintained. The observations so recorded in this meeting are reproduced hereinbelow: "1. Mr. Abdul Rauf Baloch father of Miss Nadia Mehreen. Mr. Abdul Rauf has submitted an application dated 28-7-2003 (alongwith Medical certificate), in which he has requested that the admission case of his daughter may be re-considered on humanitarian grounds, so that she is not deprived of her legitimate right. The Selection Committee rejected her application under para. No,49 of the Prospectus, as she did not appear before the Selection Committee for interview at Khuzdar on 12-7-2003. The Selection Committee maintained its previous decision with the observation that if Miss Nadia was sick at the time of interview at Khuzdar, she should have informed the Selection Committee through an application or any other source as the interview was being held in her native district."
7. The respondent No,3 (Principal, Bolan Medical College, Quetta) by means of his written statement seriously contested the Constitutional petition on the grounds mentioned therein and urged during the course of arguments by the learned A.-G. On his behalf.
8. The petitioner feeling aggrieved of the decision taken by the Selection Committee refusing to grant admission in the M.B.,B.S Class of Bolan Medical College, Quetta and the subsequent order/decision taken by the Selection Committee, rejecting her application to be reconsidered on merits for admission applied, for in view of the representation made by her father on the ground of her failure to appear in the interview held on 12-7-2003 at Khuzdar in the DCO's Office without due consideration of the reasons and grounds urged in the application being unjust, unfair and illegal as well as discriminatory and resulting into the grant of admission to the respondent No,4, has preferred the instant Constitutional petition wherein the reliefs noted above in para. No,1 supra have been claimed:--
9. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Advocate-General for the official respondents and the learned counsel for the respondent No,4 have been heard at length. Mr.H.Shakil Ahmed contended that rejection of the candidature of the petitioner on account of her non-appearance on the date fixed for the interviews of the candidates was explained on record through documentary evidence and particularly in the identical circumstances non-appearance of a candidate namely Miss Zakia Khoso was condoned by the Selection Committee, renders the decision and the subsequent order passed by the Selection Committee as illegal, violative of the sprit of the relevant paragraph of the prospectus, as well as discriminatory, moreover; as there was no objection by any candidate or otherwise against her candidature, therefore, in all fairness in the given facts and circumstances of the case she being at Serial No,4 of the merit list was entitled for the admission applied for as against the private respondent. The learned counsel vehemently contended that since at the time of final selection of the candidates held at Quetta on 21-7-2003, the petitioner appeared before the Selection Committee but was interviewed, therefore, the object of paragaph 49 of the Admission Policy for all intents and purposes stood achieved including the explanation given by her about her failure to appear for interview on the scheduled date at Khuzdar by no stretch should have resulted into non-suiting her and similarly the deliberations of the Selection Committee held on 21-8-2003 on the representation made by the father of the petitioner meant primarily for review of cases brought before it in the light of the individual grievances of the candidates, urged and explained by the petitioner ought to have been accepted, but the Selection Committee illegally passed the impugned orders, which are illegal, void and in excess of the authority vested in it, consequently; the same may be declared to be of no legal effect, inasmuch as; the impugned decisions taken by the Selection Committee are neither reasonable nor judicious in view of the directory nature of the para.49 of prospectus, which does not even provide any penal consequences. Mr.H.Shakil Ahmed argued that abrupt change in the date of the interview also caused serious prejudice to the petitioner, which Could not come to the notice of the petitioner in time, who bona fidely on 14-7-2003 alongwith her father appeared for interview in the office of the DCO, Khuzdar at the given time and came to know that the interviews were already held by the Selection Committee on 12-7,-2003, hence; in such view of the matter her failure to appear on the changed date deserved to be entertained and condoned, particularly for the reason explained in the application moved by her and the subsequent representation to have not resulted in non-suiting her. The learned counsel further submitted that no final decision by the Selection Committee was taken on the date of interview held on 12-7-2003, rather; the final selection was made by the Committee in its meeting held on 21-7-2003 in which the reasons of failure of the petitioner were duly explained by means of application and thus; there was no justification on the part of the Selection Committee to have not condoned the default. Mr. H. Shakil Ahmed further submitted that no marks are allocated for interview, which is meant only for scrutiny of original testimonials and to dispose of objections, if any; raised or coming to the knowledge of the Selection Committee in respect of the candidature of a candidate, hence; non-appearance or failure of a candidate to appear on the scheduled date for interview, who before final selection if duly explained circumstances beyond control or prevented by sufficient cause to appear in interview will not be fatal for his selection on merit, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get admission applied for as per merit assigned to her.
10. The learned Advocate-General contended that the selection made by the Selection Committee and the rejection of the subsequent representation made by the petitioner's father in view of the grounds and reasons found favour with the Selection Committee in its final meeting and deliberations of the Selection Committee made on 21-8-2003 in view of the peculiar circumstances of the case read with paragraph 49 of the Prospectus of the Bolan Medical College, are not open to any interference and exception, is not amenable to the extraordinary discretionary powers vesting in the Court. According to the learned Advocate-General the Selection Committee appropriately exercised its powers and the subsequent discretion on sound grounds in the given facts and circumstances of the case, inasmuch as; the explanation offered in the application and the subsequent representation was afterthought and belated nor the petitioner ever appeared before the Selection Committee and the plea that the petitioner was precluded or prevented by any sufficient cause was to the notice of the Selection Committee by making application promptly explaining/giving reasons for condonation of her own default in absence whereof in routine or in a mechanical way the same cannot be brushed aside lightly. According to the learned Advocate- General the impugned decisions taken by the Selection Committee were taken in accordance with the admission policy and nonadherence to the Rule will result in frustrating the object of relevant paragraph of the Prospectus, and secondly; that the candidates will not care and be serious to appear on scheduled dates for interview except in a case where a candidate promptly shows sufficient cause which prevented him to appear for interview on the scheduled date, but such exception lacks in the instant case. The learned Advocate-General submitted that the case of Miss Zakia Khoso was distinguishable on the facts, as she provided and furnished to the satisfaction of the Selection Committee with the susbstantial cause preventing her to be capable to appear before the Selection Committee for interview on the fixed date, found to be sufficient on justifiable basis by the Committee to condone the default, hence; quoting of the instance having no bearing in the instant case and refusal by the Committee to condone the default on the part of the petitioner to appear for interview on the 'scheduled date cannot be termed as discriminatory on the part of the Selection Committee.
11. Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed Hashmi, the learned counsel for the respondent No,3 contended that in the given facts and circumstances of the case non-appearance/failure on the part of the petitioner to appear for interview at Khuzdar on the altered date duly notified in the newspaper well within time; appears to be not due to any inevitable reason and the documents filed in support thereof in respect of her alleged sickness and of her father on the subsequent dates was an afterthought attempt to create justification of her non-appearance before the Selection Committee. According to the learned counsel since the private respondent has been granted admission on merit as per assigned merits of the candidates, therefore, she cannot be deprived of her admission in the college merely because of an afterthought attempts made to create justification seeking for condonation of the default on the part of the petitioner to appear in the interview held on 12-7- 2003 in the DCO's office at Khuzdar. He further contended that till date of the final meeting of the Selection Committee held on 21-7-2003, the petitioner did not submit any application with regard to her stated explanation of sickness, which allegedly precluded her to appear in the interview, rather; she for the first time submitted application in the office of the Principal, Bolan Medical College, Quetta on 23-7-2003 received in the office of the Principal on the same date but in order to show that she promptly made application instead of mentioning the actual date of the application, she deliberately and incorrectly inserted the date of application as 14-7-2003 instead of 23-7-2003 when it was actually moved in the office of the Principal of the College and such fact is quite evident from the endorsement made on the copy of the application by the dispatcher of the college to the effect that the same was received on 23-7-2003 (filed with the memo. Of the Constitutional petition). According to the learned counsel, the petitioner in fact did not physically appear even before the Selection Committee in its final meeting held on 21-7-2003 nor she made appearance before the Selection Committee in its meeting held on 28-7-2003 in view of the representation made by her father and other candidates, scheduled for review of cases relating to admissions in First M.B.,B.S. Class Academic Session 2002-2003 hence; the contention raised by the petitioner's learned counsel that the object, intents and purposes of interview stood achieved when she physically appeared in person for the scrutiny of her original testimonials and for providing explanation with regard to her failure to appear on the scheduled date for interview at Khuzdar, but she was not permitted to be interviewed or to physically appear on 21-7-2003 are misconceived and baseless. Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed Hashmi, adopted the arguments put forth by the learned Advocate-General as regards physical appearance of a candidate on the date fixed for interview, the object and purposes of paragraph 49 of the Prospectus are concerned including the alleged discriminatory treatment meted out to the petitioner and; in support thereof he placed on record photostat copy of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Constitutional Petition No,186 of 2001, in the case of Syed Suleman Shah v. Principal, Bolan Medical College and others, in which it was held that individual notices were not required to be issued for interview as per relevant paras. Of the Prospectus, rather; publication made in 'Daily Jang', Quetta 'relating to the programme of Selection Committee for holding of the interviews of the candidates at District Headquarters was brought on record by the petitioner himself and that the Selection Committee under para.30 of the Prospectus is competent to see and inquire as to whether a candidate actually belongs to the district, of which he has produced local/domicile certificate and for such reason alone physical presence of the candidate was made compulsory. It was also observed that the wisdom of the rule cannot be brought under challenge, otherwise there was no need to constitute Selection Committee, headed by the Chairman, Public Service Commission nor the petitioner has sought for relief that para. No,47 of the prospectus be struck down and in any case; the same was held to be not in violative of Article 22 (4) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Moreover; in the said judgment reverting to the tround of discrimination, it was observed that the private respondent whose admission was challenged on the ground that she did not appear for interview before the Selection Committee on the scheduled date, it was noted that she subsequently appeared before the Selection Committee on the third day front the date of the scheduled interview and her request for interview was allowed by the Selection Committee and thus; the Honourable Court concluded that the respondent whose admission was assailed on account of her default to appear for interview that she not only approached the Selection Committee at the time of final meeting held for selection of candidates, but was interviewed. Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed Hashmi lastly submitted that the Selection Committee appropriately in the lawful exercise of powers vesting in it rejected the candidature of petitioner on account of her failure to appear for interview, is also in accord with the relevant para. Of the admission policy, which for plausible reasons and valid basis rejected the application submitted by the petitioner after the date of final selection and similarly appropriately it did not review its earlier decision for being not open to any exception.
12. The contentions put forth on behalf of the parties' learned counsel and the learned Advocate- General who appeared for the official respondents, have been considered in the light of the documents annexed with the memo. Of Constitutional petition and the impugned orders passed by the Selection Committee; we, have carefully perused para.49 of the Prospectus and the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Constitutional Petition No,186 of 2001 referred to by the learned counsel for the private respondent. The admitted feature of the case is that as per notice published in 'Daily Jang', Quetta (Urdu) dated 27-6-2003 issued by the Principal, Bolan Medical College, Quetta the candidates from District Khuzdar, Kalat, Kharan, Lasbela and Awaran were required to appear for interview before the Selection Committee seeking for admission in the first year M.B.,B.S. Course and first year B.D.S Course on 14-7-2003 at 9-30 a.m. In DCO's Office, Khuzdar and further that Selection Committee will hold its final meeting for the selection of the candidates in the DCO's office at Quetta on 21-7-2003 (Monday) at 9-00 a.m. They were also informed by means of this notice that the candidates should bring along their original testimonials including acknowledgement receipt. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner fell sick and remained admitted in the WAPDA Hospital from 11-7-2003 to 13-7- 2003, and; on 14-7-2003 when she alongwith her father reported at Khuzdar for verification of documents they were informed that interviews have already been conducted on 12-7-2003 and she was further informed by the authorities of the Selection Committee that the change in the date of interview was notified on 4-7-2003 in the newspaper, but on account of eruption of law and order situation, curfew was imposed hence; she had no chance to read the newspaper of the said date and remained ignorant of the same. Vide notice published in 'Daily Jang', Quetta dated 4-7- 2003, photostat copy whe'eof has been filed with the memo. Of petition; the candidates, who had applied for admission for Academic Session 2002-2003 in Bolan Medical College from Districts Kalat, Khuzdar, Kharan, Lasbela, Mastung and Awaran were informed that their interviews scheduled to be held on 14-7-2003 will now to be held on 12-7-2003, accordingly; all the candidates from these districts were informed by means of the said notice to appear on 12-7-2003 at 9-30 a.m. In the office of DCO, Khuzdar and to bring along their original testimonials. On this date, admitted position is that the petitioner did not appear before the Selection Committee at Khuzdar. In respect of the plea of her illness photostat copy of the medical certificate issued by the Medical Superintendent, WAPDA Hospital, Quetta dated 11-7-2003 has been filed with the memo. Of Constitutional petition, issued on a prescribed pro forma meant for the officers in BPS-16 and above, although; the petitioner was not an employee of the WAPDA, however; it shows that she was suffering from Enteric Fever and Amebic Dysentery in the relevant column of the certificate filled in by the concerned, which shows that she was recommended for three days' leave with effect from 11-7-2003 to 14-7-2003. No other document in support of the state of health of the petitioner and the medicine, if any; prescribed by the doctor for the noted sickness of the petitioner has been filed nor produced during the course of arguments. Moreover; the medical certificate does not show that she suffered from such sickness up to 13-7-2003 and was hospitalized, rather; the stated state of health of the petitioner as stood on 11-7-2003 has been noted in the medical certificate, whereas; in the Constitutional petition it was contended that she remained admitted in the WAPDA hospital from 11-7-2003 to 13-7-2003, therefore, in absence of any supportive material it cannot be assumed that she remained admitted in the WAPDA Hospital from 11-7-2003 to 13-7-2003 nor it can be safely inferred that she without undergoing treatment for the Enteric Fever and Amebic Dysentery abruptly with' a bad state of health, as observed in the medical certificate, 'stood completely cured and she was able to travel to Khuzdar with her father where she statedly came to know after having been informed that interviews had already been conducted on 12-7-2003 by the Selection'
Committee. It appears that the petitioner, whose father admittedly is posted as Executive Engineer in WAPDA was successful in procuring the medical certificate in favour of his daughter which in no way renders any support to her plea that she was hospitalized with effect from 11-7-2003 to 13-7- 2003. Next, it has been pleaded and contended that due to law and order situation, curfew was imposed on account of which she remained ignorant of the subsequent notice published in 'daily Jang', Quetta about the change of the date of interview, also seems to be devoid of any substance, as no document or any other material has been produced or filed in support of such plea that on 4th of July curfew was imposed in Quetta City where she ordinarily resides as per address given in the title of the Constitutional petition and thus; on account of the curfew she could not come across the notice published in 'Daily Jang', Quetta on 4-7-2003. Even if it be assumed that curfew was imposed in Quetta city on the said date, the petitioner still was to show that it was enforced/commenced at what hours; as newspapers ordinarily as a matter of common notice, are distributed and become available in market at early hours of the morning, hence; such plea also remained unsubstantiated, benefit whereof ipso facto in view of these pleas cannot be extended to petitioner seeking for condonation of the default to appear for interview on 12-7-2003 before the Selection Committee at Khuzdar. It is pertinent to note that in the initial notice published in the `Daily Jang', Quetta on 27-6-2003 pursuant to which the petitioner statedly appeared for interview at Khuzdar alongwith her father on 14-7-2003, it was specifically brought to the notice of the candidates that final meeting of the Selection Committee will be held at Quetta on 21-7-2003 in the DCO's Office, Quetta and minutes of the meeting of the Selection Committee held on the said date in respect of admissions in Bolan Medical College, Quetta for Academic Session 2002-2003 has also been filed with the memo. Of petition and thus; according to the petitioner's own showing she was well aware that the final meeting for the selection of the candidates was to be held on 21-7-2003, but till such date she did not submit any application to the Selection Committee, Bolan Medical College explaining her position in view of the pleas taken in this petition. She for the first time submitted an application in the office of the Principal, Bolan Medical College (respondent No,3) on 23-7-2003 as it appears from the copy of the application filed with the petition containing official stamp and signature of the receipt clerk of the office of the Principal containing endorsement to such effect, whereas; the date on the application has been inserted as 14-7-2003, which obviously cannot be treated as the date on which it was received in the office of the Principal. In this application as well, it was contended that she was hospitalized at Quetta from 11-7-2003 to 13-7-2003, but such plea as hereinabove discussed apparently is without any substance, and secondly; request was made in the application that her case on medical grounds be considered for admission in the first year M.B.,B.S. Class, Academic Session 2002-2003. In the minutes of meeting of the Selection Committee held on 21-7-2003 it was specifically observed by the Selection Committee that the petitioner failed to appear before the Selection Committee for interview on 12-7-2003 at Khuzdar and she did not submit any application about her absence, however; the Selection Committee waited for her for the interview and later directed the DCO, Khuzdar that if the candidate comes or submits an application on the same date it should be forwarded to the Committee thus; in these circumstances, it was concluded by the Selection Committee that as she was absent from interview and did not submit any application on the day of interview at Khuzdar, hence; her application for admission in the M.B.,B.S. First year in Bolan Medical College was rejected under para.49 of the Prospectus for the Academic Session 2002-2003, to which no exception can be taken for the simple reason that the petitioner did not submit any application till the date of final meeting of the Selection Committee, i,e, 21-7-2003. Hence; application submitted in the office of the Principal, Bolan Medical College on 23-7-2003 subsequent to the above-said date could not have been brought under consideration, subsequently; her father on 28-7-2003 submitted an application for review of the decision taken by the Selection Committee on 21-7-2003 to the Chairman, Balochistan Public Service Commission/Chairman, Selection Committee, Bolan Medical College, Quetta. Reiterating that her daughter (petitioner) fell sick and remained hospitalized from 11-7-2003 to 13-7-2003 in WAPDA Hospital, Quetta and on 14-7-2003 when they reported at Khuzdar for verification of documents they were told that the interview has already been conducted on 12- 7-2003, about the change in the date of interview notified in the only newspaper on 4-7-2003 which did not come to their hands due to Quetta incident and they remained ignorant of the change brought in with regard to the interview date, and; moreover; he also remained hospitalized from 20-7-2003 to 21-7-2003 in Akram Hospital, Quetta, however; she stated to have reported in the final proceedings of the Selection Committee dated 21-7-2003 held at Quetta and also handed over copy of application dated 14-7-2003 to Mr.Naeem Kasi of Bolan Medical College, but was not allowed to appear before the Committee to clarify her position and she was told by the said official that her application has already been rejected. The minutes of the meeting referred to above, copy whereof has been filed with the memo. Of petition does not indicate that the petitioner did appear before the Selection Committee on 21-7-2003 for verification of her original testimonials and to clarify her position. Therefore, in absence of any supportive material it cannot be assumed that she appeared before the Committee on the aforesaid date, but was not allowed by the Selection Committee to explain her position for having failed to appear on 12-7-2003 for interview. Secondly; had it been so; there was no occasion for the petitioner to have obtained acknowledgment of receipt of her application on 23-7-2003 from the Receipt Clerk of the office of Principal of Bolan Medical College. No document in support of the petitioner's father having been hospitalized from 20-7-2003 to 21-7-2003 in Akram Hospital, Quetta has been produced nor the same appears to be relevant in the matter. The fact remains that on 28-7-2003 the petitioner's father filed a review application before the Chairman, Selection Committee which was considered by the Selection Committee, as evident from the copy of the minutes of the Selection Committee held in the office of the Chairman of Balochistan Public Service. Commission at Quetta and for reasons mentioned in the minutes of meeting; the Selection Committee refused to review its earlier decision which is neither fanciful, arbitrary, misconceived nor suffered from any legal infirmity, in the given facts and circumstances of the case in view of the relevant paras. Of the Prospectus of the College for the Academic Session 2002-2003 and dealt with in the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Constitutional Petition No,186 of 2001 wherein it was held that individual notices as per admission policy are not required to be issued for interview, rather; publication made in the newspaper relating to the programme of the Selection Committee for holding of the interviews of the candidates at District Headquarters was perfectly valid within the meaning of relevant para. Of Prospectus and that the Selection Committee is competent to see and inquire as to whether a candidate actually belongs to the District of which he has produced local/domicile certificate and for such reason alone physical presence of a candidate was made compulsory, moreover; wisdom of the Rule cannot be brought under challenge otherwise there was no need to constitute the Selection Committee, headed by the Chairman, Balochistan Public Service Commission as well as the relevant para. Of Prospectus requiring physical presence of a candidate was also held to be not in violative of Article 22(4) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, moreover; in the said judgment reverting to the ground of discrimination it was observed that the private respondent, whose admission in first year M.B.,B.S. Class was brought under challenge on the ground that she did not appear for interview before Selection Committee on the scheduled date, the Honourable Division Bench noted that she subsequently; appeared before the Selection Committee on the third day from the date of the scheduled interview and her request was allowed by the Selection Committee, who not only before the date of final Selection approached the Selection Committee but also appeared before it at the time of final selection of the candidates.
The contention that discrimination has been meted out to the petitioner as in identical circumstances, non-appearance of a candidate namely Miss Zakia Khoso was condoned by the Selection Committee. It may be seen that facts relating to these two cases are quite distinguishable except to the extent that they each failed to appear on the scheduled date for interview. In the case of Miss Zakia Khoso, whose default in appearance before the Selection Committee was condoned, because, her father promptly without loss of time approached to the Selection Committee and; brought to its notice that due to severe damage of the Bibi Nani Bridge on account of rain flood in Bolan, his said daughter was rendered incapable to appear for interview before the Selection Committee and thus; she was permitted to appear before the Selection Committee on the final date of meeting already notified for the selection of candidates, accordingly; she was interviewed and the Selection Committee after its having been satisfied with the explanation and the genuineness of the inevitable event condoned the default and she was selected on merits to be entitled for admission in the first year class of Bolan Medical College. In the instant case as hereinabove mentioned neither the petitioner nor her father promptly approached to the Selection Committee by explaining circumstances on account of which the petitioner stated to have been precluded to appear on the fixed date for interview before the Selection Committee, but for the first time after the date of the final meeting, application was submitted by the petitioner in the office of the Principal, Bolan Medical College on '23-7-2003 and secondly; the grounds on which condonation of the default in appearance before the Committee was sought for, also for reasons mentioned hereinabove are devoid of any substance, hence; in our considered view failure on the part of the petitioner to appear for interview on the scheduled date cannot be condoned in routine or in a mechanical way unless the circumstances which prevented the petitioner to be physically present before the Selection Committee brought to the notice of the Selection Committee promptly as well as to have appeared at least before the Committee on the date fixed for final meeting already notified in the first notice published in the newspaper referred to in the memo. Of Constitutional petition. All the more in the given facts and circumstances of the case, it was obligatory on the part of the petitioner even if it be assumed that she had no knowledge that the date of interview initially notified was antedated to 12-7-2003 instead of 14-7-2003, she should have without loss of time could have easily brought the factors resulting into her non-appearance on the date of interview to the notice of the Selection Committee by fax, telegram etc. but she appears to have not cared nor acted with due diligence, therefore, the petitioner at a belated stage and more particularly for the reason that the other candidate standing on merit, who had appeared for interview, has been selected and granted admission in the first year class of the college; cannot be permitted to take benefit of her own wrongs nor the private respondent to be deprived of her legitimate right of admission accrued to her on account of failure of the petitioner to appear for interview and the subsequent lapses on her part. No doubt para.49 of the admission policy of the college, though; being mandatory in nature is not absolutely inflexible in all circumstances, but it does have scope of flexibility in view of the principles of the fairness, reasonableness and wisdom embodied in its spirit to admit for an explanation to condone default of candidate if he was precluded or prevented by an act of God or any other sufficient cause to be physically present before the Selection Committee for interview on the particular date and such factors are promptly and without loss of any further time are brought to the notice of the Selection Committee on or prior to the date of final meeting of the Selection Committee, falls within the scope of its inherent powers to reconsider and to satisfy itself as to the genuineness, and the explanation, if any; offered by a candidate to condone the default or otherwise, as the case may be; unless it is shown that the powers and exercise of authority so vested in the Committee. Have been exercised arbitrarily or fancifully, which in our estimation in the instant case is lacking, as the Selection Committee applied its mind to the facts and circumstances of the case and did not find it fit to condone the default, therefore; her case even does not fall within the exception.
Undoubtedly; no marks have been allocated for a candidate, who appears before the Selection Committee for interview nor does the physical appearance before the Committee, provides any criteria to grant admission to a.Candidate but all the same, in view of the scheme and admission policy, physical appearance of a candidate for interview is not without any ratio and logic, as on such date the Selection Committee has to scrutinize the original testimonials of candidates and satisfy itself about the candidates to be bona fide residents i,e, local/domicile of the districts of which they have applied for admission on merits against the reserved seats of the districts or otherwise, as well as; to make further inquiry if needed be as regards genuineness, validity of a local/domicile certificate is concerned, hence; in such view of the matter, the provisions of para.49 of the Prospectus are mandatory in nature, else; it would be difficult fol. The Selection Committee to discharge its functions objectively and on the other hand; the candidates at their option will approach to the Committee for interview giving various reasons to be interviewed on the date of final meeting of the Committee and before that, which obviously has to result in jeopertizing the whole scheme of the admission policy meant for selection of the candidates. No document or other material has been filed or produced before this Court indicating that the petitioner did appear or approach to the Selection Committee on the date of its final meeting for interview and to explain her position, hence; as contended before us by the petitioner's learned counsel that the intent and purpose of the para.49 of Prospectus stood fully complied with, is also without any substance for the reason, as according to the petitioner's own showing for the first time application was delivered in the office of the Principal on 23-7-2003 filed as annexure to the Constitutional petition dealt with hereinabove and in this application even it was not alleged that she appeared and approached to the Selection Committee on the date of its final meeting held on 21-7-2003, therefore, it cannot be said that she approached to the Committee on the aforesaid date. Thus; for the above reasons this Constitutional petition, being without merits and devoid of any substance, is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.