1. ' SARDR MUHAMMAD SHARIF KHAN, J.-Very peculiar circumstances have given rise to this writ petition against the respondents. The Government of Pakistan has always been pleased to reserve a handsome number of seats in the Technical Institutions of Pakistan for the candidates from State including refugees from Occupied Kashmir settled in Pakistan. The allotment respecting nomination of seats reserved for Kashmir Nationals is left at the disposal of Azad Kashmir Government which for this purpose has set up a Nomination Board. This Nomination Board, presided over by the Chief Secretary in exercise of its powers, nominated candidates for their admission to 1st Year M.B., B.S. Class in Medical Colleges of Pakistan against quota of seats reserved for Azad Kashmir nationals for the academic year 1976-77 vide Annex are `C' in this behalf.
2. ' The petitioners as well as respondents Nos. 3 & 4 namely, Maroof Hussain and Shafqat Humza Ashai were the candidates before the Nomination Board for their selection to be made out of whom, according to rules, framed by the Government, the petitioners came out successful in their selection for their admission to different Medical Colleges to start with the 1st Year M.B., B.S. Classes.
3. ' The respondents Nos. 3 and 4 failed to carry the day before respondents Nos. 1 and 2 as they were unable to improve their division though they were able to improve their marks.
4. ' The claim of respondents Nos. 3 and 4 was and still is the same that on basis of improved marks they were entitled to admission to Medical Colleges as compared to the petitioners because as per rules recently framed by the Health Department of Pakistan, candidates improving their marks were to be given preference over those candidates who have the less marks in the same division though obtained in the very first attempt but more than the marks obtained by the respondents in their first attempt. The Board rejected their plea on the ground that the criteria fixed by the Government go in favour of the petitioners. Against this decision of the Board, writ petitions were filed by respondents Nos. 3 and 4 in this Court against the petitioners Nos. 1 anti 2 but they failed to obtain a verdict to be returned by the Court in their favour as the nomination of the petitioners by the Board was legally held valid in accordance with rules prescribed by the Government for nomination of the candidates from the State against the seats reserved in the Medical Colleges of Pakistan. Accordingly, a letter of authority for admission of the petitioners to the Medical Colleges was issued by the Nomination Board on the basis of which they were to get admission in various Medical Colleges of Pakistan but strange enough to say that quite contrary to the decision of the Nomination Board, and confirmed by the High Court, respondents Nos. 3 and 4 were able to get admission in preference to the petitioners by encroaching upon the rights of the petitioners.
5. ' The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 is that it was in accordance with the rules that they were selected. This contention has no force in it as it has already been rejected by this Court vide judgment dated 14th February, 1977. This judgment was supported by a Division Bench ruling of this Court in a case entitled "Malik Mahmood Ahmad v.
6. Chairman Nomination Board and others". The learned Counsel for respondents Nos. 3 and 4 have cited a number of rulings contending that the High Court in writ jurisdiction was not competent to interfere with the order of the Tribunal or an authority, though the name of such authority was not disclosed, on purely equitable consideration. None of the rulings cited by the learned counsel is applicable to the circumstances of the present case. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 who are the only competent authority to nominate the candidates against the Medical seats reserved for State nationals, have categorically admitted that their decision in favour of the petitioners still stands and no nomination of respondents Nos. 3 and 4 was made by them. Therefore, there is no other lawful authority who could select respondents Nos. 3 and 4 against the seats reserved for State nationals. Therefore, it cannot be said that they have been able to seek admission through proper channel.
7. ' Again, the argument of the learned counsel for respondents Nos. 3 and 4 is that no writ of mandamus can be issued either against the Ministry of Health or Ministry of Kashmir Affairs, Government of Pakistan as they do not have any business to be performed in connection with the affairs of Azad Kashmir and further that they have not been impleaded as a party and so also no writ can be issued against them. It is correct to say that no writ of mandamus can be issued against the Ministries of Pakistan which are not even impleaded as a party. It is beyond the Government of Azad Kashmir and its Nomination Board that respondents Nos. 3 and 4 manipulated their admission to the Medical Colleges as a result of which manipulation the petitioners were deprived of their earned rights as against the respondents Nos. 3 and 4. The Government and the Nomination Board who are respondents Nos. 1 and 2 still stick to their decision and say that their nominees for the impugned medical seats are the petitioners and not respondents Nos, 3 and 4, namely, Maroof Hussain and Shafqat Humza Ashai. Obviously, respondents Nos. 3 and 4 have usurped the rights of the petitioners in an illegal manner to which they are not entitled in any case against the seats reserved for State nationals as compared to the petitioners, the nominees of Azad Government of the State of Jammu & Kashmir which is itself and its Board is the only competent authority to make selection of candidates from Azad Kashmir according to the rules framed by it for selection of candidates from Azad Kashmir. The advantage of reservation of seats for Azad Kashmir nationals can even go to a candidate less in merit on basis of district-wise quota as per rule framed by the Government even though there may be a better candidates available from other districts.
8. ' It appears that it was on some letter written by the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir that the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 were allotted seats by someone in Pakistan instead of nominees of the Government, 1. e. Petitioners. The Prime Minister alone does not constitute the Government. It consists of Prime Minister and his Ministers. Thus any act of the Prime Minister which is not owned by the Government, is of no worth in the eye of law, on the basis of which some-one in the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs deprived the petitioners arbitrarily from their seats, allotted to them validly by the Government and in this way the authority of the Azad Kashmir Government was brought into contempt. Evidently, it was through the malpractice that respondents Nos. 3 and 4, namely, Maroof Hussain and Shafqat Humza Ashai encroached upon the rights of the petitioners and assumed the role of usurpers who cannot legally be benefited in any manner, whatever, for the medical seats reserved for Azad Kashmir Nationals by the Government of Pakistan. It is a pity to note that respondents Nos. I and 2 have not risen to the occasion to perform their duty to get the petitioners admitted in the Colleges concerned thereby ousting respondents Nos. 3 and 4 from the seats usurped by theft. In these circumstances, it is the duty of the Government to see that its order in respect of the selection of the petitioners is obeyed by the person concerned and no usurpers be allowed to violate the authority of the Government and infringe the rules framed by the latter through malpractices. The Government should realize its authority to act vigorously and rigorously in performance of its function so as to let the people feel that the Government is potent enough to do what is bound and required by law to do and so there is no hesitation for the Court to hold that the replacement of respondents Nos. 3 and 4 against the seats reserved for State nationals and allotted to the petitioners is without lawful authority and is of no legal effect, that is to say that respondents Nos. 3 and 4 are not entitled to the seats already allotted to the petitioners, the nominees of the Government.
9. ' Therefore, this writ petition is accepted with costs and the Government and its Nomination Board are hereby directed that on the basis of nomination of the petitioners their admission to the Medical Colleges concerned be arranged by taking up the matter with the authorities concerned in Pakistan so as to meet the ends of justice. The counsel's fee paid by the petitioners will be Rs, 300.