' QAZI FAEZ ISA, C J.--- The petitioner applied for admission to Bolan Medical College Quetta ("College") against one of the four reserved seats for District Gwadar to the MBBS Programmed in August, 2008 for the Academic Session 2008-09. The petitioner stood at S. No,4 as per the result of the Pre-Entry Test. The petitioner however was not given admission on the reserved seat and as to respondent No,3 Miss Raeesa Aziz, who on the pre-entry test having obtained 43.640 marks against 43.843 marks of the petitioner instead obtained admission. The College came to the conclusion that the petitioner was not entitled to get admission on the reserved seat in terms of paragraph 32 of the College Prospectus 2008-2009, "(Prospectus"). Paragraph 32 of the Prospectus reads as under:--- "A candidate or his/her father/mother/guardian as the case may be found in possession of two or more local/domicile certificates issued by competent authority of different Districts/Agencies in the time of applying for admission, shall not be considered for admission against the seats of any District/Agencies for which he or she has applied. Such cases can be considered as a special case only if he or she or the parents/guardian inform the committee at the time of admission and that too have got cancellation of their certificates at least two years before applying for admission in Bolan Medical College, Qeutta, if such cases not mentioned at the time of admission will be de- seated without any notice and will not be eligible for admission in future for at least three coming years, And he or she has no right to appeal in any Court of law."
2. The Selection Committee determined in the light of paragraph 32 of the Prospectus that the petitioner is not entitled to get admission on the reserved seat for District Gwadar. The decision of the Selection Committee in this regard is reproduced as under:--- "The Selection Committee went through the report of EDO Revenue Gwadar dated 15-12-2008 Mr. Noroz Khan son of Abdullah of District Gwadue (Gwadar) at S. No,4 on merit list is holding in two locals at one time i.e, Local of Gwadar as well as Local of Kech, therefore under clause 32 of the College Prospectus 2008-09 his candidature stand rejected against reserved seat of District Gwadar and the next eligible candidate be admitted in Bolan Medical College, Quetta during the academic session 2008-09."
3. Not being satisfied with the said decision the petitioner approached the Chief Minister of Balochistan, who referred the matter for reconsideration by the Selection Committee. However, the Selection Committee unanimously maintained its earlier decision. The said decision is reproduced as under:--- "The Principal, BMC placed before the Selection Committee the case of Noroz Khan son of Abdullah resident of District Gwadar on the direction of Honourable Chief Minister as envisaged in his letter No,PS-CM/1-1/2008/1781 dated 22-1-2009. The case was discussed by the Selection Committee and all the Members were of the unanimous view that the previous decision of the Selection Committee stands correct and rejected Mr. Noroz Khan son of Abdullah's candidature for admission according to Para No,32 of the Prospectus 2008-2009."
4. Being aggrieved by the decisions of the Selection Committee of the College the petitioner filed the instant petition and sought the following reliefs:---
(i) declare that decision of Selection Committee rejecting candidature of petitioner (originally as well as on reference from the Chief Minister) is illegal and without lawful authority;
(ii) declare that Para 32 of the Prospectus is unreasonable and liable to be quashed;
(iii) as a consequence of the above declarations, admission of 3rd respondent in place of petitioner was unlawful".
5. Mr. Muhammad Aslam Chishti, learned counsel for petitioner however did not address any arguments on the alleged unreasonability of paragraph 32 of the Prospectus. He simply maintained that paragraph 32 does not come in the way of the petitioner. In this regard learned counsel stated that whilst admittedly the petitioner held Local Certificate of District Kech but on his request the same was cancelled on 29-8-2007 and on the day the petitioner submitted his application he held only one Local Certificate that of District Gwadar.
6. On the other hand Mr. Ghulam Mustafa Buzdar, learned counsel for the private respondent Miss Raeesa Aziz opposed the petition on the following grounds:---
(i) The application, submitted by the petitioner to the Executive District Officer (Revenue) District Kech for cancellation of the petitioner's Local Certificate, stated that the petitioner intended to move to District Gwadar;
(ii) That the petition was based on mala fides as Local Certificate was obtained simply for obtaining admission;
(iii) Petitioner concealed the facts that he held two Local Certificates and even if the Local Certificate in respect of District Kech was cancelled on 28-9-2007 the petitioner was required to disclose the same in terms of paragraph 32 of the Prospectus;
(iv) The second sentence of paragraph 32 of the Prospectus created an exception, but the same was not attracted to the case of petitioner since the cancellation of District Kech Certificate was required to have been cancelled at least two years prior to applying for admission;
(v) Paragraph 32 of the Prospectus provided for penal consequences if disclosure was not made and as such the provisions thereof were mandatory; and
(vi) The Chief Minister had no authority to require the Selection Committee to re-consider its earlier decision;
7. He also placed reliance on the case of Kishwar Rehman v. Government of Balochistan, PLD 2001 Quetta 78. The Division Bench of this Court in that-case had held that; "Object of reserved seats for various districts in professional college appears to give legal protection to the students of backward area in order to bring them at par with the developed area of the country. This departure from merits has a Constitutional protection in case of educational institutions financed by the Government. So, this object would certainly be defeated if the students who are not permanent/genuine residents of the district, manage the certificates and get admission."
8. Mr. Nasrullah Achakzai, learned Additional Advocate-General, supported and adopted the arguments of Mr. Ghulam Mustafa Buzdar, learned counsel for respondent No,3.
9. Admittedly in August, 2008, when the petitioner applied to the College for admission, he as per his own showing had held a local certificate of District Kech. The local certificate of District was got cancelled on 29-8-2007, whilst the local certificate of District Gwadar annexed with the petition is dated 17-2-2007. Accordingly, it is clear that the petitioner held two local certificates to two different districts for the period 17-2-2007 till 29-8-2007. Even if the petitioner had got one certificate cancelled it would not entitle him to apply on the reserved seats of a particular district, since the requirement of the College in this regard was three fold; Firstly the local certificate of one district should have been cancelled, "at least two years before applying", secondly, the petitioner was required to so "inform the Committee at the time of admission" and, thirdly, the exercise of the discretion by the Committee was by way of 'special case' and not as of right. Therefore, since the stipulated two years had not expired and the Committee had not been informed about the petitioner holding two certificates, the exception by way of 'special case' provided in paragraph 32 of the Prospectus was not attracted. The Selection Committee in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner on the reserved seat of District Gwadar, therefore, committed no illegality. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed, but no order as to cost.