' EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, C.J.--Petitioner through the instant petition has asked for the issuance of an appropriate writ directing the respondents to admit her against the seat reserved for gala Dhaka on annulment of admission granted to respondent No,4.
2. The essence of the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that when neither the respondent nor her father is domiciled of Kala Dhaka, the former is not entitled to get admission, against the seat reserved therefor.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents by referring to certain documents tried to canvass at the bar that respondent No,4 being a daughter of a person domicile of the area of Kala Dhaka was rightly given admission in the College.
4. We have gone through the record carefully and have also considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
5. Main thrust of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner was against the genuineness of domicile certificate issued to the father of respondent No,4. He by referring to certain particulars mentioned therein tried to make it doubtful in order to make out a case for the cancellation of admission granted to his daughter. But all these questions being related to the factual controversy cannot be gone into by this court while hearing a petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. We thus at this stage would not like to intervene. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to question the genuineness and validity of the certificate by filing a civil suit in the competent court.