' FAROOQ ALI CHANNA , J.---The petitioner Muhammad Asif Khan has filed this constitution petition claiming that on the basis of his graduation he applied for admission in LL.B. Part-I in Government Jinnah Law College Hyderabad the respondent No,2, his request was acceded. The respondent No,2 also called for Enrolment Card to be obtained from respondent No,3 for which he fulfilled the prescribed pro forma supported by academic certificates showing his graduation passed in Third Class, on payment of usual fee Enrolment Card No,4609 dated 9-3-2010 was issued to him by the Controller of University of Sindh Jamshoro the respondent No,3. After completing academic year the petitioner submitted examination form along with relevant documents for appearance in the LL.B., Part-I examination 2008-2009, but the respondent No,2 informed him that University of Sindh the respondent No,3 has raised objection to the issuance of admit card to the students who have passed graduation in third Class as they were not eligible to appear in LL.B. Part-I examination. The petitioner thereafter approached the respondent No,3, but was given deaf ear. Since the LL.B. Part-I examination was to be commenced from 20-4-2010, therefore, he filed this constitution petition with the following prayers:--
(a) Declare that the petitioner having being issued Enrolment Card No,4609. Dated 9-3-2010 on the basis of B.A (pass) Third Class from University of Sindh, is entitled to appear at the current LL.B.
Part-I examination 2008-2009.
(b) Direct the respondent No,3 to allow the petitioner by issuing admit card to appear at the LL.B.
Examination Part-I 2008-2009 commencing from 20-4-2010.
(c) The respondent be saddled with the cost of the petition.
(d) Any other relief deemed fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
2. Pursuant to notice, the respondent No,3 filed parawise comments that the respondent No,2 despite knowledge that the petitioner being graduate in third Class, was not eligible for the admission in LL.B. Part-I, has given him admission in violation of Rules/Admission Policy under which no graduate in third Class was entitled for admission in LL.B. Part-I. The petitioner succeeded in obtaining the enrolment card with connivance of staff of respondents Nos.2 and 3. The University took serious notice of it and terminated Deputy Registrar (G&A) who was signatory of enrolment card of the petitioner, also suspended the clerk concerned who had prepared the said card, consequence whereof the enrolment card issued in favour. Of the petitioner was cancelled, and the Principal of Government Jinnah Law College the respondent No,2 was asked to take necessary action in this regard. It was further pleaded in parawise comments that the petitioner under the Rules/Admission Policy was not entitled for admission in LL.B. Part-I and the respondent No,2 has allowed the admission illegality, malafidely and without lawful authority, such Illegal act of the respondent No,2 does not create any lawful and vested right in favour of the petitioner.
3. The respondent No,2 did not file the para wise comments however, they filed objections/reply supported by the affidavit of Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shaikh Principal Government Jinnah Law College, Hyderabad to the application under section 151, C.P.C. It is stated in para-5 of the objections/reply that all the Universities including Karachi University, Sindh University and other Universities have banned third divisionars for admission in LL.B. Part-I, as such, the results of the petitioner was not declared, no discriminatory policy has been followed in the case of the petitioner. In para-8, it is further stated that the petitioner's eligibility being Zero for admission in LL.B. Part-I, the illegal admission of the petitioner was cancelled.
4. We have heard Mr. Ghulam Sarwar Qureshi, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Mukhtar Ahmed Khanzada, State counsel, Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shaikh, Advocate/Principal Government Jinnah Law College, Hyderabad and Mr. Kamaluddin, Advocate for respondent No,3.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is not at fault to which he is penalized by withholding his result of LL.B., Part-I and declining his appearance in annual examination of LL.B. Part-II. The claim of the petitioner is that the respondent. No,2 after proper examination and verification of his academic certificates acceded his request for admission in LL.B Part-I and pursuant to his said admission the competent authority of the University of Sindh Jamshoro issued Enrolment Card to him, such facts are not denied by both the respondents Nos.2 and 3. If the respondents. Nos. 2 and 3 have committed any mistake or did wrong, the petitioner should not suffer on that account. Learned counsel further contended that if the petition is not allowed the future academic career of the petitioner will be spoiled.
6. Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shaikh, Principal of respondent No,2 in his arguments has supported the case of petitioner half heartedly and has contended that petitioner should not be penalized on account of policy not approved by the Syndicate Committee of the University of Sindh Jamshoro till the admission was given to the petitioner. The main contention of the learned Principal was that the minutes of the meeting dated 3-11-2008 under the procedure are, to be placed before the Syndicate Committee and unless the decision taken in the meeting are not approved the same have no binding effect, as such, the admission of the petitioner in LL.B Part-I cannot be termed as violative of Rules/Admission Policy of the University. However, Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shaikh on confronted with his written objections and its supporting affidavit, remained mum, besides did not dispute the contents of the same.
7. We may mention here that the submissions of learned Principal are contradictory to the action taken by him after realizing that there was complete ban on admission to the candidates who passed graduation in third Class, therefore, he cancelled the admission of the petitioner. We may further mention that on completion of the arguments learned Principal requested for time to submit the law in support of his contention, but till date he has not submitted the same.
8. Mr. Kamaluddin, Advocate appearing for the, respondent No,3 has vehemently opposed the petition and has contended that the admission of the petitioner in LL.B. Part-I granted by the respondent No,2, so also issuance of enrollment card in his favour was the result of collusion between the petitioner and some employees- of the respondents Nos.2 and 3. The Sindh University had taken serious note of issuing the Enrolment Card to an ineligible candidate and terminated the Deputy Registrar (G&A) and 'also suspended the, clerk concerned. Learned counsel further contended that the petitioner - had succeeded in getting the admission in LL.B. Part-I and Enrolment Card in utter violation of the decision dated 3-11-2008 taken in the meeting of the Principals of Law Colleges, affiliated with the university of Sindh. It is settled law that the recipient of ill-gotten benefit cannot be allowed to retain the same in future, therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed. Learned counsel also referred to certain documents in support of his contentions.
9. Learned State counsel has adopted the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the respondent No,3. He has also challenged the maintainability of Constitution Petition and contended that no fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed by Constitution is denied by any authority.
10. Before parting with the merits of the case, we may mention here that during pendency of the petition the respondents, cancelled the admission and enrolment card of petitioner, copies whereof were placed on record with advance copy to the counsel for the petitioner. However, the petitioner A despite the knowledge that the respondents Nos.2 and 3 have cancelled his admission in LL.B Part-I and enrolment card, did not file any application seeking the amendment in the petition or in the prayer clause for restoration of his admission and enrolment card, therefore we are of the firm view that since the admission of the petitioner and enrollment card issued in his favour have been cancelled by the competent authorities, he is not entitled to be allowed to appear in LL.B. Examination, as such, the prayers sought in this constitution petition became infructuous and the petition is liable to be dismissed on that score alone.
11. However, reverting to the merits of the case, we have perused the minutes of the meeting of the Principals Law Colleges affiliated with the University of Sindh held on 3-11-2008 which reflected that Professor Aftab Ahmed Shaikh, Principal Government Jinnah College, Hyderabad, the respondent No,2 also attended the meeting and participated actively, wherein a decision regarding the admission in LL.B Part-I was taken which is reproduced as under:-- "Decision No,2..."
It was decided that no admission shall be allowed to LL.B. Part-I class to a candidate who has passed the pre requisite examination in Third Division from any University "
12. We have also examined the documents referred by the learned counsel for the respondent No,3 during arguments. Per learned counsel the meeting dated 3-11-2008 was held to consider and discuss adoption of reviewed and revised curriculum in the subjects of LL.B (3 years programme) by the National Curriculum Revision Committee (NCRC). The policy was communicated to the concerned authorities by the Secretary NCRC, which reads as under:- "The matter was deliberated and the members of the committee submitted that the National Curriculum Revision Committee's recommendations appearing at Page-39 signed by Professor Ashfaq Ahmed Khan, Secretary NCRC (Law) may be considered and implemented. The Chairman of the committee also said that revised curriculum as incorporated in the curriculum Development Project sponsored by Ministry, of Education Islamabad for LL.B Degree Course programme) (revised 2001) by Professor Ashfaque Ahmed Khan, Secretary, NCRC (Law) at Page-39 may be resolved to be implemented and acted upon.
' It was unanimously resolved that the matter may be referred to the Academic Council University of Sindh Jamshoro for taking further steps for implementation of the (revised 2001) curriculum of Law for LL.B (3 years programme) from the next year."
13. The decision taken in the meeting dated 3-11-2008 was placed before the Vice-Chancellor who, while exercising the powers under section. 14(3) of the University of Sindh Act, 1972, approved the same. The approval of the Vice-Chancellor reads as under:-- "In the meeting of the Dean, Faculty of Law and. Principals of Law Colleges, affiliated with the University of Sindh, held on Monday, the 3rd November, 2008, the following decision was taken: "It was unanimously decided that no admission to LL.B Part-I class in session 2008-2009 and onwards, shall be allowed to a candidate who has passed the prerequisite Graduate examination in Third Division from any University".
"The preference shall be given to the candidate who has passed the prerequisite Graduate examination from the University of Sindh."
' As the meeting of the Academic Council is not scheduled to meet in near future, therefore, the Vice Chancellor was pleased to approve the above decision taken in the meeting of the Dean Faculty of Law and Principals of Law College affiliated with the University of Sindh under section 14(3) of the University of Sindh Act, '1972.
' The Academic Council may kindly note the action taken by the Vice-Chancellor."'
' For the sake of convenience we feel it appropriate to reproduce section 14(3) of the University of Sindh Act, 1972 as under: "Section 14(3).---The Vice Chancellor may in an emergency which in his opinion requires immediate action, take such action as he may consider necessary and shall, as, soon thereafter as possible, report his action to the officer, authority or other body which in the ordinary course., would have dealt with the matter."
14. The aforesaid decision of Vice-Chancellor was placed for approval as item No, 3(ii) in the 35th meeting of the Academic council held on 24-6-2009 and it was resolved unanimously that actions taken by the Vice-Chancellor from 3(i) to 3(v), be noted. In view of above position supported by the provision of the Act of the University of Sindh 1972, we do not find legal force in submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Principal Government Jinnah Law College that the decision regarding Admission in LL.B, Part-I taken in the meeting dated 3-11-2008 has no binding effect.
15. The decision taken in the meeting dated 3-11-2008 was communicated to the Principals of All the Law Colleges much prior to granting admission to the petitioner by the respondent No,2 as such the admission of the petitioner was in violation of the aforesaid decision which later on was realized by the respondent No,2 therefore he cancelled. The admission of the petitioner against which no relief has been sought for as stated in the preceding paras. The decision regarding the admissions taken in the meeting of the Principals per learned counsel for the respondent was in order to formulate a uniform policy for admissions in LL.B. Part-I already approved by the Karachi University and other Universities.
16.. Since the respondent No,2 is affiliated with the University of Sindh Jamshoro, he is bound to follow the rules, regulations and policies laid down by the University. In the light of. Decision No,2 taken in the meeting held on 3-11-2008 approved by the Vice-Chancellor and the Academic Council in it 35th meeting held on 24-6-2009, the respondent No,2 had no power/authority to give admission to the petitioner in LL.B. Part-I being graduate in third class/division therefore not eligible for admission. Besides, respondent No,2 has categorically stated in his objections/ supported by affidavit of Principal that in view of the ban imposed by the concerned University, the admission of the petition has been cancelled.
17. The upshot of above discussion, the petition being devoid of merit is dismissed.