MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ, J.--- This judgment shall decide Writ Petition 1303 of 2006 and Writ Petition 6326 of 2005, as common questions are involved. The petitioners in both these cases as well as private respondents in Writ Petition No.1303 of 2006 having passed their intermediate examination (F.Sc.) and also having qualified the entry test are competing for a seat reserved for admission to a Medical College in Punjab (Nishtar Medical College, Multan). The reserve seat pertains to Rajanpur Tribal Area. There is no dispute that inter se the said students have been graded as follows on merit with reference to the cumulative score achieved by them:---
(1) Muhammad Usama Rahim son of Dr. Mian Abdul Rahim73.972%
(2) Sara Gurchani daughter of Mehboob Hussain Gurchani66.866%
(3) Faria Javed daughter of Javed 66.304%
(4) Syed Hassan Raza Bukhari son of Syed Mukhtar Hussain65.973%
2. Mr. Atta Ullah Khan Tareen, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that his client is a genuine resident and domiciled of Rajanpur Tribal Area. The father of Muhammad Usama Rahim, respondent No.3 (petitioner in the Writ Petition No.6326 of 2005) has managed to obtain a domicile certificate from the said area illegally rather fraudulently by misrepresenting facts and that respondent No.1 D.C.O. Is liable to cancel the domicile certificate of the said respondent as also the other private respondents. According to the learned counsel father of the said respondent originally obtained a domicile in respect of a settled area of Rajanpur showing his residence in village Fazilpur Tehsil Rajanpur District D.G. Khan. Thereafter he got the said domicile certificate cancelled and obtained another domicile certificate in the year 1996 showing him to be a resident of village Muranj in the tribal area of 'Rajanpur District. The learned counsel insists that this exercise has been undertaken only to get his son admitted to the Medical College against the said reserved seat.
3. Mr. Zafarullah Khan Khakwani, A.A.-G. Has produced the original records pertaining to the said proceedings. According to the learned A.A.-G. The domicile certificate had been issued in the year 1996 in accordance with law, as the father of the said respondent No.3 is an owner of land in the said village and is a resident thereof.
4. Messrs Tahir Mehmood and Muhammad Sarwar Awan, Advocates, for the said respondent No.3 vehemently urged that their client is at the top of the list amongst the contestants and these proceedings have been filed maliciously to deprive him of what is his right. According to them the proceedings took place as far back in the year 1996 whereas the said respondent passed his examination in the year 2004-2005 and then applied for admission and no sinister and malicious motive can be attributed either to the father of respondent No.3 or the D.C.O. Concerned in this matter. The representative of the Admission Board contends that the question of domicile has been verified by the D.C.O. He further contends that none of the petitioners have had education from the said tribal area. All the counsel representing the private parties referred to an earlier judgment, dated 3-5-2005 in Writ Petition No.8282 of 2005 wherein this Court had held that in case the educational facilities are not available in the tribal area then it would not be required of a candidate to establish that he has received education from the tribal area. Mian Abbas Ahmad, Advocate, learned counsel for respondent No.5 has not much to say as his client is nowhere near the other candidates on the merit list.
5. I have gone through the files of these cases with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties. The D.C.O. In his reply has stated that all the domicile certificates issued to the several candidates are in order and have been issued after following the legal procedure.
6. Now I have gone through the original proceedings that took place on the application of Mian Abdul Rahim, the father of said Muhammad Usama Rahim. This application was filed on 2-6-1996; he prayed for the change of his domicile as he had changed his residential place. The affidavit accompanying the application narrates that he was formerly resident of Fazilpur Tehsil Rajanpur District D.G. Khan and a A domicile certificate had been issued to him on 2-9-1970 and that now he has migrated to village Muranj. A copy of the voters list for the year 1986-87 from the said area was also filed. The Political Tehsildar after obtaining reports from the Patwari and Risaldar of Border Military Police reported that Dr. Abdul Rahim is a resident of village Muranj. The original certificate earlier issued was surrendered and is present in the file. It was thereafter that the certificate of domicile was issued on 20-8-1996.
7. Mr. Atta Ullah Tareen, Advocate, has drawn my attention to an application addressed by the said Dr. Abdul Rahim to the Health Department, Government of the Punjab, Lahore, praying for fixation of his seniority. The learned counsel particularly points out that in this application he has shown his permanent address as c/o Fareed Medical Store, Fazilpur, District Rajanpur. The application is dated 10-3-2000. The learned counsel was confronted with the said application and it has been explained that at the relevant time there was no post office in Muranj whereas there is branch post office for Fazilpur and it was for this reason that he had given the address c/o Fareed Medical Store. A copy of list of post offices has been shown to me. I find the said explanation to be sufficient.
Now the learned counsel for the petitioner has cited the cases of (1) Miss Rakhshanda Aslam and another v. Nomination Board of Azad Jammu and Kashmir through its Secretary, Muzaffarabad and 2 others PLD 1986 SC (AJ&K) 1; (2) Ahmad Hassan v. Abdullah and 5 others PLD 1992 Pesh. 1; (3)
Chaudhry Noor Muhammad v. Province of West Pakistan and another PLD 1971 Lah. 367 to urge that the domicile certificate could not have been changed mechanically and some inquiry must have been instituted. I have examined the said judgments. So far as the judgment from the Honourable Supreme Court of AJ&K is concerned, the same interprets the provisions of Azad Jammu and Kashmir State Subjects Act, 1980 and is not relevant. Now so far as the judgment of the Peshawar High Court is concerned, I find that the rule laid down is that there was no prescribed procedure in the matter and the report of Tehsildar was found to be in order by the learned Peshawar High Court. So far as the judgment of this Court is concerned, the rule laid down is that a domicile certificate could be demanded as a matter of right and the District Magistrate has no discretion.
Nothing turns in this matter on the basis of the said judgments.
8. There is no denial that Muhammad Usama Rahim, petitioner in Writ Petition No.6326 of 2005 is at the top of the list of qualifying) candidates rather far ahead of the other private parties.
9. For all what has been discussed above, the Writ Petition No.1303 of 2006 is dismissed while Writ Petition No.6326 of 2005 is allowed and the official respondents are directed to grant admission to Muhammad Usama Rahim, petitioner, against the said reserved seat for Tribal Area, Rajanpur, subject to fulfillment of other terms and conditions. The original records be returned to the learned A.A.-G.