ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, J.---This Constitutional Petition has been filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan ("the Constitution") with the following prayers: "In view of the above mentioned circumstances, it is therefore, very humbly prayed that under the circumstances narrated and mentioned above, the respondent very kindly be directed to consider the application of the petitioner in the interest of justice and equity .
Any other , relief which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper may also be awarded."
2. Brief facts of the instant petition are that pursuant to the advertisement made by the respondent No.1 the petitioner applied for the Medical and Dental College Admission Test (MDCA T), whereby the following admission criteria was set: FSC Marks (for Balochistan) 65% MDCA T (2019-2020) 50% That the Petitioner appeared in the entry test and obtained 99 marks out of 200, which stand as 49.5% and as per international standards 49.50% marks are always read as 50% in round figure, which makes the petitioner eligible for the admission; that the respondent vide its advertisement No.PID(Q)531/19 invited applications for the Self- Finance category seats and it was stated that a candidate is eligible to apply for admission if he or she has passed the entrance test of any University of Pakistan; that the respondent published another advertisement bearing NO.P1D(Q) 530/19, whereby it was state d that a candidate who has passed MDCA T 2019-2020, is eligible for the admission and petitioner has passed the MDCA T, even the petitioner also appeared in Higher Education Aptitude Test (HAT) held on 13th October , 2019 conducted by the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan (HEC ) and passed the same for the admission of Medical College; that the petitioner moved an application on the name of the Chairman, Admission Committee and appraised the entire situation and prayed for considering her for admission, but in vain, hence this petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner secured 99 marks out of 200 marks and obtained more than 49%, but the respondent No.1 has denied admission to petitioner in BUMHC; that it is the responsibility of the BUMHS to conduct the entry test but failed to do so and the test was conducted by the University of Health.
Sciences, Lahore (UHS); that the entry test was completely out of course; that the petitioner belongs to remote area of Balochistan and it is responsibility of the respondents to promote the education in Balochistan specially in remote areas.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents Nos.1 and 2 stated that the petitioner daughter's has failed to pass the MDCA T exam and the FSc marks cannot be considered for the admission; that as per rule and regulation of admission policy the petitioner is not eligible for the admission of MBBS/BDS and the MDCA T is mandatory for admission.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, learned AAG and have perused the record with their able assistance. The perusal of record reveals that the Pakistan Medical Council (PMC) has decreased the passing marks for MDCA T from 60% to 50%. It is worthwhile to mention here that the Provincial Admission Committee of BUMHS agreed to reduce the eligibility criteria of 60% for MDCA T to that of 50% for Balochistan, which was also approved by the Syndicate of the BUMHS. The PMC also endorsed the decision of the Syndicate of BUHMS. It would be appropriate to reproduce the decision of the PMC in its meeting held on 06.12.2019: "Provincial Admission Committee Meeting was held on 14th October 2019. Registr ar, PMDC attended the meeting.
In the meeting it was discussed that still Balochistan is having peculiar situation which requires special attention.
The results of MDCA T 2019-20 were presented before the members which revealed that only 608 candidates qualified to be admitted in medical and dental institutions as they secured 60% above marks in MDCA T 2019-20, against 400 seats including new medical colleges still not recognized by PMDC. Which limits the selection of students as the pattern of selection in Balochislan is quota based. In some of the districts hardly a single or even no candidate reached to qualifying level, hence in such districts the seats would remain vacant. It would be a great loss for the province. It was proposed to decrease the threshold from 60% to 50%, to ensure availability of candidates for competition. Brig. Hafeez, Registrar , PMDC also in principle agreed to the proposal. From this house same proposal is to be approved so that the merit based result be declared to finalize admission process within the time line set by PMDC. The members also agreed with the proposal of the V ice Chancellor ."
6. Admittedly the petitioner secured 99 marks out of 200 which is less than 50%. The petitioner claimed admission in BUMHS on special consideration, which is not permissible under the law. In the advertisement published by the respondent No.1 inviting application from the eligible candidate, clearly shows the criteria/condition laid down for the eligibility of the candidates in the following manner: "1. Eligibility .
I. (a)....
(b)....
2. It is mandatory far candidates of Balochistan province to appear in MDCA T for admission to any public sector Medical/Dental College/institution of the province."
7. The prospectus, rules and regulation framed by the public educational institution are administrative policy of the respective institute, recognized and made applicable to all the candidates without any discrimination. It is to be noted that in academic matters the University authorities are the best judges to interpret the Rules and Regulations framed by the university authorities. The Courts are required to avoid to interpret the same unless a case of grave injustice is made out otherwise it would become difficult for the universities to run their affairs. Reliance in this regard is placed on a judgment of the honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan reported as Muhammad Ilyas v Bahauddin Zakariya University , Multan and another (2005 SCMR 961 ), wherein it has been held that:-- "5. We have heard the learned counsel and have also gone through the relevant regulation. At the outset it may be noted that as far as the rules/regulations framed by the University Authorities for the purpose of conductive/regularizing examination etc. of University are concerned these are required 'to be interpreted by the University Authorities itself and Courts should avoid to interpret the same unless a case of grave injustice is not made out otherwise it would become difficult for University administration to run its internal affairs relating to examination, etc. Further , a perusal of Regulation 8(F) and its other parts clearly demonstrate that the petitioner was required to obtain (CGP A) independently in each Semester for the purpose of promotion to the next Semester .
As it has been pointed out hereinabove that the petitioner did not obtain requisite (CGP A) in the 3rd Semester i.e. 2.00 (CGP A), therefore, University Authorities in exercise of power conferred upon them under Regulation 8(F) rightly removed his name from the roll. The learned I.C.A. Bench after examining the case of petitioner in depth reached to the conclusion that he was required to obtain 2.00 CGP A in the 3rd Semester , therefore, his name was rightly removed from the roll of University as impugned judgment is just and legal, therefore, no interference is called for this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan."
In this regard reliance is also placed on the case of Fakharyar v. Agriculture University Peshawar PLD 2016 Peshawar 266 .
8. The objection raised by the petitioner that test was conducted by the UHS purely based on Panjab Text Book Board pattern has no force in it for the reasons that in this regard the petitioner has not filed any application during test. The objection of the petitioner is afterthought cannot benefit the petitioner . Moreover , the petitioner has not challenged the decision of the Admission Committee of BUHMS which was approved by the Academic Council of BUHMS on 11.11.2019 and endorsed by the PMC on 06.12.2019 as referred above. The deviation from the policy open the flood gate, therefore, for the strengthening of institution the policy should be followed and deviation from the same would cause disrespect the institution.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner also referred Regulation 9 and its sub-regulation (2) of the notification issued by the PMDC in exercise of power conferred by Subsection(2) of Section 33 of the PMDC Ordinance 1962 (XXXII of 1962), but the same has no relevancy with the case of the petitioner .
In view of above, this petition is dismissed.