Muhammad Rafique and Iftikhar Ahmad, petitioner, who were two students of Diploma Course of Agriculture (Field Assistant) for the Session of 2006-2008 have knocked the door of this Court, by complaining the issuance of a Notice No. 3278-81, dated 30.12.2006, by Director Agricultural Training Institute, Rahimyar Khan, directing them to retrieve the amount deposited by them alongwith original documents, as their names were cancelled from the role of students.
2. Facts narrated, stated and found from the record are that for the Diploma Course of Field Assistant for the Session of 2006-2008, for the first year class, Director Agriculture in service Agricultural Training Institute, Rahimyar Khan got published a notice of admission, in the daily newspaper "Khabrain Multan" published on 23rd of August, 2006 inviting candidates to join, the course. The petitioners, who had admittedly passed Matric on third division, had applied for the above-noted admission. After scrutiny of their admission forms, and all the relevant documents, both the petitioners were granted admission, Muhammad Rafique on 6.11.2006, while Iftikhar Ahmed on 29.9.2006. It is pertinent to note that Iftikhar Ahmad was granted admission on the basis of sports also. They were directed to deposit security funds, mosque funds, student welfare funds, electricity charges, admission fee and all other dues demanded, which they had deposited with the Institute. There were issued roll numbers and were directed to attend the classes. After the attendance of afore-mentioned classes for some time, they were issued the above-noted notice dated 30.12.2006, by which their admission was cancelled on the ground that petitioners were the possessor of third division Matric Certificate and according to rules and regulations such students were not entitled/eligible to be granted admission in the aforesaid course
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners submits that the petitioners had not committed any fraud or forgery. They had depicted their third division Matric position in the admission forms but even then they were granted admission, as many posts were vacant and not many were fond of to take admission. Even at present there are also many seats lying vacant. After the payment of dues and the attendance of classes for about one and three months respectively, the petitioners have been issued impugned notice, which cannot be issued and the admission cannot be cancelled on the basis of rule of poenitentiae as the petitioners have got vested right after the grant of admission. Learned counsel has referred to a judgment of this Court, which was published in 2003 YLR 556 (lmtiaz Ahmed Lone v. University of Engineering and Technology through Vice.-Chancellor. Taxila and 2 others). He has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of 'Pakistan reported in 1997 SCM R 15 (Chairman, Selection Committee/Principal, King Edward Medical College, Lahore and two others v. Wasif Zamir Ahmed and another). He also submits that Iftikhar Ahmad was granted admission on the sports basis also which was a special reserved seat for players.
4. Conversely, the learned A.A.G. Has half- heartedly submitted that petitioners were Matric with third division and according to the advertisement and in the rules and regulations, they were not eligible to be granted admission in the aforesaid diploma course. Therefore, they were rightly stuck of from the role of the Institution.
5. I have considered the arguments of both the learned counsels and have perused the record. It is an admitted fact that petitioners were granted admission even after having the knowledge of their being third division in Matric. How they managed to pay the dues is another fact, which I do not want to dilate upon on the record, which fact has been displayed in the application of Iftikhar Ahmad, that he had paid the amount of dues of the Institute after selling some articles of his house to get the admission. It is also correct that petitioners were third divisioners and were not eligible to apply for the admission but in the same way, department has also not acted with vigilance. They had allowed them to join the course, after knowing that they were third divisioners. The issuance of roll numbers to them, permission to attend the classes and passing of some time with Institute, thereafter the cancellation of their names at that stage cannot be approved and held legal on the basis of rule of poenitentiae. There was no fraud committed by the petitioners, so that they could be removed afterwards. Therefore, relying upon the above-noted decisions of this Court as well as the apex Court, I fully endorse the view taken by these Courts, and declare the notice issued for cancellation of their admission to be illegal and unlawful. Consequently, the petitioners shall remain on the role of Institute as students of the diploma course of Field Assistant and continue their study with all the consequential liabilities and benefits. So, the writ petition having been accepted is disposed of without any order as to cost.