1. ' USMAN Ali SHAH, J.--In this Constitutional petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that she is the permanent resident of Peshawar District being in possession of a Domicile Certificate duly issued to her by the District Magistrate, Peshawar, but while she was seeking admission in the Khyber Medical College, Peshawar as First Year M. B., B. S. Student, Respondent No, 1 (Deputy Commissioner, Peshawar) addressed a Memorandum No, 979/PA, dated April, 1978 (Annex. F) to Respondent No, 2 (Principal, Khyber Medical College, Peshawar) that the parents of the petitioner hail from Malakand Agency and the address given by her in the Domicile Certificate already issued to her is incorrect and so the said Domicile is being considered for cancellation. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed that the action of Respondent No, 1 to cancel her Domicile Certificate be declared unlawful and of no legal effect and further Respondent No, 2 be directed to consider her for admission to the first year M. B., B. S. Course in the Khyber Medical College, Peshawar.
2. ' The petitioner has submitted in the petition that she was born at Peshawar on 1st April, 1959. Her parents own a House bearing No, 25 situate in Zaryab Colony, Peshawar City and since the date of her birth she is living with her parents in the said house at Peshawar. That originally she joined New Model School, Peshawar and thereafter she secured admission in the Presentation Convent High School, Peshawar, in 1966, from where she passed her Matriculation Examination in 1975. After this, she joined F.Sc. (Pre-Medical) Class in the Government Frontier College for Women, Peshawar, from where she passed the Intermediate Examination as F. Sc (Pre-Medical) Student from the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Peshawar.
3. ' These facts made by the petitioner are not disputed by the respondents. The question for determination would be whether in the circumstances the petitioner has been able to establish that she has become the permanent resident of Peshawar District and thus the Domicile Certificate already issued in her favour to that effect by the District Magistrate, Peshawar, cannot be cancelled. But before we proceed to determine this question, we would like to take note of the fact that Respondent No, 1 has since cancelled the Domicile Certificate of the petitioner, vide para. 2(i) of his comments wherein he has submitted that the petitioner was required to produce documentary proof from the Political Agent, Malakand, that her parents have permanently abandoned their previous domicile and have taken up their permanent abode at Peshawar but since she failed to produce any such proof, the Domicile Certificate already issued to her was cancelled. In this connection, we have gone through the inquiry file produced by a Clerk of the Deputy Commissioner's Office. It shows that Mr. Haidar Gul, City Magistrate, Peshawar, was appointed as Inquiry. Officer to report whether the petitioner is a permanent resident of Peshawar District or Malakand Agency. The learned Inquiry Magistrate issued notice to the petitioner to appear before him on the due date. However, there is nothing on the file to show whether the said notice has been returned duly served nor is there anything on the file to show that the petitioner had appeared before the learned Inquiry Magistrate on the due date. It will thus be seen that the question regarding the domicile of petitioner is under inquiry before the learned Inquiry Magistrate, but Respondent No, 1 in his comments has stated that her Domicile Certificate has been cancelled.
4. He being a responsible officer should have given the real position of the matter. We administer him a note of caution and hope that he will not do any such thing in future.
5. ' Now reverting to the merit of the present case : Rule 23 of the Pakistan Citizenship Rules, 1952, lays down that a District Magistrate may issue a Certificate of Domicile to a person on his application in the prescribed form duly supported by an affidavit. As regards the procedure to be adopted before issuing a Certificate of Domicile to a person, there seems to be no statutory provision to this effect.
6. In other words, it has been left to the discretion of the competent authorities that before issuing a Certificate of Domicile to an applicant they should take such steps as to satisfy them about his permanent place of residence. In the present case, the petitioner has claimed that since her birth she has been living in Peshawar with her parents who own their residence in Zaryab Colony, Peshawar City and further that she had studied in various schools in Peshawar. It was on this basis, she added, that she was issued the Domicile Certificate by the District Magistrate. Now it is not a secret fact that in order that the District Magistrate is satisfied about the permanent place of residence of an applicant, his application is marked to the SHO concerned to inquire about the truth of the statement of the applicant. Then the inquiry report of the SHO comes to a Magistrate who testifies the same and signs the Domicile Certificate of the applicant. Thereafter, the Domicile Certificate is put up to the District Magistrate who countersigns it. It is not disputed that this process has been gone through in the present case with respect to the issuance of Domicile Certificate to the petitioner. Now as the petitioner has been able to prove that since her birth in Peshawar she has been living with her parents who own a house and further that she had studied in various schools at Peshawar she had, therefore, been rightly issued the Domicile Certificate about her being a permanent resident of Peshawar District and thus there can hardly be legal justification to cancel her Domicile Certificate unless it is shown that she had taken up her permanent abode in Malakand Agency or for that matter anywhere else. It may be observed that a citizen has the right to adopt his domicile wherever he wants in the country and there would be no legal justification for the concerned authorities to refuse him this right.
7. ' This petition is, therefore, allowed and in consequence the impugned memorandum issued by Respondent No, 1 to Respondent No, 2 is held to be illegal and of no lawful authority with the result that Respondent No, 2 would proceed to consider the case of petitioner for admission to the First Year M. B., B. S. Course in the Khyber Medical College as the ' permanent resident of Peshawar District. Under the circumstances, the Deputy Commissioner, Peshawar, shall pay the costs.