#TBS Muhammad Qahir Shah for Petitioner.
1. Addl. A.-G. And Raja M. Afsar for Respondents.
2. Date of hearing: 16th August, 2005.
3. JUDGMENT #TBE MUHAMMAD NADIR KHAN, J.---Petitioner who has been refused admission in Bolan Medical College Quetta (hereinafter referred to as BMC) against the reserved seat for children of non-doctors government servants working in Balochistan Health Services and Paramedical Staff of Provincial Health Department Balochistan Quetta has approached this Court by filing of this constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic of Pakistan 1973, challenging the selection of respondent No.3 with following prayer:-- "It is, therefore, in view of the above submissions, respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to declare as follows:--
(i) Declaring that the impugned decision of respondent No.1 statedly made on 23-4-2005 published in newspaper dated 3-7-2005 by overruling the objection of petitioner over the candidature of respondent No.3 is illegal, void and in excess of authority. Declaring that the respondent No.3 is not eligible to get admission against one of the reserved seats in view of Para.No.3(4) of Chapter-I, of the prospectus of B.M.C. In session 2004-2005 pursuant to the impugned decisions statedly made on 23-4-2005 is nullity in the eyes of law to be declared having no legal effect.
(iii) Declaring that the private respondent being not eligible for admission in first year M.B.,B.S. In B.M.C. For academic session 2004-2005, therefore, admission granted to him by respondent No.1 is of no legal effect.
(iv) Declaring that the impugned decision dated 23-4-2005 of respondent No.1 in respect of respondent No.3 is violative of report of E.D.O. (Rev.), Quetta/ Chairman Local Domicile Certificate Committee dated 8-5-2005.
4. ' After declaring that the respondent No.3 was not eligible or entitled for grant of admission in 1st year M.B.,B.S. In B.M.C. For session 2004-2005, the petitioner be declared to be eligible and entitled for grant of admission in 1st year M.B.,B.S. In B.M.C. For current year 2004-2005.
(v) Pending disposal of the main petition, the petitioner may kindly be ordered to be admitted provisionally by respondent No.2 in 1st year M.B.,B.S. In Bolan Medical College for academic session 2004-2005 against reserved seat in view of para.No.3(4) of Chapter-I of the prospectus.
(vi) Any other relief which this Honourable Court may find deem fit and appropriate in the circumstances of the case, may also be awarded with cost of the proceedings, in the interest of justice and equity."
5. ' The case of the petitioner is that he applied for admission in B M.C. For current session 2004-2005 against reserved seat for children of non-doctors government servants working in Balochistan Health Services and Paramedical Staff of Provincial Health Department Balochistan Quetta for whom one seat has been allocated under para.3 (C) 4 of Chapter-I of the prospectus. According to the petitioner his father is serving in Balochistan Health Services and the petitioner being local resident of District Pishin qualified to apply for the said reserved seat. The respondent No.3 also applied for his admission against the said reserved seat. After entry test the respondent No.3 stood at Serial No.1, whereas the petitioner stood at Serial No.2 of the merit list. The petitioner challenged the candidature of the respondent No.3 by filing written objections and report of E.D.O. (Revenue)
6. Quetta showing that the domicile certificate of the father of the respondent No.3 was suspicious while his mother was in possession of domicile certificate issued from District Gujrat and her name was also entered in the name of the domicile of her husband but the Selection Committee for B.M.C. For session 2004-2005 rejected the objections of the petitioner and granted admission to respondent No.3 in M.B.,B.S. Session 2004-2005.
7. ' In response to the pre-admission notice respondent No.3 filed parawise comments, contending that the applicant who applies against reserved seat under para.3(C) 4 of the Prospectus is also to fulfil the condition given in the end of the breakup of medical seats which reads as under :-- "Note"
8. ' Respondent No.2 also filed parawise comments and supported the plea of the The children of only those employees shall be eligible who have served in the Bolan Medical College, Quetta cadre, and the Directorate General Health Services Cadre, Paramedical Staff Cadre, for at least 10 years in the above cadre, separately. Children of retired and deceased employees having served for the said period shall also be eligible. The seat shall stand abolished if there are no eligible candidate."
9. ' Respondent No.3 further contended that his mother in year 1976 was inducted as trainee Lady Health Visitor by the Government of Balochistan and was imparted two years training, on completion of the same, was appointed as such in December, 1978, whereafter she ceased to be a resident of Gujrat District in Punjab. Similarly his father arrived in 1964 and subsequently obtained domicile certificate of Quetta District in year 1978. Petitioner was born in Quetta on 21st December, 1985 and received all his education in Quetta. Petitioner stood first in the merit list and was rightly and legitimately selected for admission in M.B.,B.S Session 2004-2005 respondent No.3.
10. ' Mr. Muhammad Qahir Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Aminuddin Bazai learned Additional A.-G., Raja M. Afsar Advocate for respondent No.3 and Suhail Zaman representative B.M.C. Have been heard at length and the documents available on the record perused minutely in the light of the B.M.C. Prospectus 2004-2005.
11. ' There is no dispute between the parties about respondent No.3 being at Serial No.1 of the merit list of the candidates who had applied for the reserved seat under para.3(C) 4 of the Prospectus. It is also not dispute that mother of respondent No.3 is in service of Balochistan Health Services and Paramedical Staff of Provincial Health Department Balochistan Quetta as Lady Health Visitor since year 1978. The petitioner who too applied against the reserved seat under para.3(C)4 of the prospectus stood second in the merit list and at the time of interview challenged the candidature of the respondent No.3 mainly on the ground that the respondent No.3 is not a bona fide reident of Quetta and his such plea was based on the address mentioned in the domicile certificate of the father of the respondent No.3, wherein he gave his permanent address as Post Office Kojanwali Tehsil, District Gujrat and his temporary address was mentioned "shop of Muhammad Anwar at Robert Market, Quetta Cantt." While in the identity card his address is different. The petitioner further stated that the mother of the respondent No.3 is basically resident of Tehsil Phalia, District Gujrat wherefrom she obtained domicile certificate on 26-7-1975 which still subsists and simultaneously on 26-8-197 she entered her name in the domicile certificate of her husband namely Ali Ahmed Rana, wherein the name of respondent No.3 was also included, hence on the basis of said domicile certificate the respondent No.3 was stated to be not eligible to seek admission in B.M.C.
12. ' It seems that regarding status of domicile certificate of father of respondent No.3 the Selection Committee of B.M.C. For admission session 2004-2005 called report from Executive District Officer (Revenue), Quetta, which was submitted on 8-4-2005 and following was observed:-- "Both of the parties were directed to attend the office of undersigned along with their supporting documents and the matter was then taken up on various dates, the undersigned personally conducted an enquiry in respect of the two domiciles of Arwan Ali son of Ali Ahmed Rana, the candidate also filed written reply regarding written objection of Mr. Aminullah son of Zainuddin, after the parties the report is submitted as under:--
1. That the mother of Arwan Ali, namely Kalsoom Akhtar daughter of Dale Khan obtained her domicile certificate from Gujrat on 28-7-1975, which is still intact, and not been cancelled, the status of said domicile certificate has been confirmed from concerned quarter. Moreover on 4-4- 2005 the mother of Arwan Ali attended the office of undersigned, who during hearing also admitted and confirmed the issuance of domicile certificate from Gujrat and not being cancelled till year, meaning thereby that she hold two domicile certificates (i.e. The domicile certificate issued from Gujrat and entering her name in the domicile certificate of her husband namely Ali Ahmed Rana), thus in view of para.30, Chapter No .2 of the prospectus, Mr. Arwan Ali is not eligible to get admission in Bolan Medical College Quetta in session 2004-2005.
13. 2 The candidate Arwan Ali on the basis of his mother's service in the Health Department, applied against one of the reserved seats allocated for the employees of Health Department and admittedly the mother of candidate at present is holding two domicile certificates, one of Mr. Ali Ahmed Rana and the second issued from Gujrat therefore under law and admission policy the candidate cannot hold two domicile certificates.
3. After thorough probe and enquiry the candidate Arwan Ali or his family is not residing on the addresses mentioned in domicile certificate of Mr. Ali Ahmed Rana, this fact has also been admitted by Awran Ali and his mother during personal hearing, therefore the domicile certificate seems to be obtained through misrepresentation."
14. ' The Selection Committee, however did not accept the objection raised by the petitioner and also were not persuaded by the report of E.D.O. As the objection raised by the petitioner were overruled, the respondent No.3 was granted admission and the objections raised by the petitioner were dealt with in the following terms:- "Mr. Arwan Ali son of Ahmed Rana (District Quetta)
15. ' Mr. Arwan Ali son of Ali Ahmed Rana had applied against the seat reserved for children of Health employees. He is on Merit No. 1 . However Syed Aminullah son of Syed Zainuddin at S.No.2 of the merit list raised objection that mother of Arwan Ali possesses two Domicile Certificates i.e. One from Quetta and the other from Gujrat, as such, he is not eligible for admission.
16. ' The Selection Committee scrutinized the relevant documents and heard the complainant as well as Mr. Arwan Ali, who explained that her mother was in possession of a Domicile Certificate from Gujrat prior to her. Marriage. However, after her marriage, her name was entered in the Domicile Certificate of her husband his father. He further clarified that he did not avail any facility from the Domicile Certificate of his mother, which otherwise had no validity after entry of his mother's name in the Domicile Certificate of her husband/his father. Additionally his mother had used her Domicile Certificate for service only, many years ago.
17. ' The Selection Committee deeply scrutinized the ' documents and found assertions of Mr. Arwan Ali correct it was further observed by the Committee that Note to Para-3 of the prospectus also does not debar the candidate from seeking admission. In such circumstances, Selection Committee overruled the objection and allowed admission to Mr. Arwan Ali son of Ahmed Ali Rana, being at S.No.1 of the merit list in this category."
18. ' It would, be relevant to mention that eligibility of the candidates for their admission in B.M.C. In addition to fulfilling the conditions against the reserved seats are also to fulfil the requirements of Chapter-II of the prospectus which includes Para-25 stating that admission to B.M.C. Quetta is open to the genuine local domicile candidates of the Province of the Balochistan. As already stated therein no dispute about respondent No.3 fulfilling the condition of para.3(C)4 of the admission policy for B.M.C., Quetta being son of Lady Health Visitor who is in service of Provincial Health Department Balochistan Quetta since year 1978 and respondent No.3 being son of Ali Ahmed Rana who was issued domicile certificate in year 1975 and his such domicile certificate has not been cancelled and includes the name of respondent No.3 fulfils the condition of para.25 Chapter-II of the prospectus 2004- 2005. Mere observation of E.D.O. About obtaining of the domicile certificate by misrepresentation on the ground that the father of respondent No.3 does not reside on the address given in the domicile certificate issued far back in year 1978, would not render the domicile certificate invalid, as the facts that (i) since arrival of the father of the respondent No.3 in year 1964 till date lie is residing in Balochistan Quetta (ii) mother of respondent No.3 is in service of Health Department as Lady Health Visitor since 1978. (iii) the respondent No.3 was born in Quetta and (iv) received all his education in Quetta, are not disputed, therefore, status of the father of the respondent No.3 as well as of respondent No.3 being domicile of Quetta Balochistan cannot be denied only because his present address does not tally with the address mentioned in the domicile certificate obtained in year 1998; whereas issuance of domicile certificate to the mother of the respondent No.3 from Gujrat District and also entering her name in the domicile certificate of her husband would not affect the status of the father of the respondent No.3 as well as respondent No.3 being domicile of Quetta, who never obtained any domicile certificate from any other place nor his name was incorporated in the domicile certificate of his mother pertaining to District Gujrat.
19. Hence respondent No.3 being son of Lady Health Visitor fulfilled the condition of para.3(C)4 of the Prospectus 2004-2005 and he being domicile of Quetta Balochistan as per domicile certificate issued to his father wherein his name is also mentioned, fulfils the condition of para.25, Chapter-II of the Prospectus 2004-2005. In such view of the matter the findings of Selection Committee granting admission to respondent No.3 cannot be termed as illegal or against the conditions of B.M.C. Prospectus 2004.2005 so as to make any room for interference by this Court exercising its constitutional jurisdiction.
20. ' The petition being without any merits is dismissed in limine with no orders as to cost.