1. ' MUHAMMAD ZAHOORUL HAQ, J.--The petitioner who had secured 3986 marks in examination of Mechanical Production with Specialization in Foundry Technology from Gujrat Institute of Technology has felt aggrieved that his name was not published in the list of the successful enterances of Dawood College of Engineering on 6-5-1986 and instead one Imdad Hussain who had passed the examination in Diploma of Associate Engineer in Metallurgy and Welding with admittedly lesser marks was selected.
2. ' There is one seat reserved for a candidate from Punjab in the B.E.Metallurgical Engineering Course of this college of respondent No,2 and the requirements. Are: (i) Diploma in Metallurgical Technology and (ii) Diploma in Mechanical Technology with specialization in Metallurgy in case no candidate with diploma in Metallurgical Technology is available. The position, therefore, was that there was a student available with respondent No,2 who had the requisite qualification of diploma in Metallurgical Technology and in presence of that diploma holder preference could be given only to that person who was having better marks in Metallurgical Technology. The petitioner is not a candidate who has better marks in Metallurgical Technology, at least A from the first certificate that has been issued in his favour. He had the diploma in Mechanical Production with specialization in Foundry. He did not even have the specialization in Metallurgy, therefore, he did not even come to the level of the requirement of Dawood Engineering College. At least this was the position till 6- 5-1986 when the selection was made by Dawood Engineering College and, therefore, there was nothing wrong in the selection made by them.
3. ' Petitioner's counsel Mr. Kunwar Mukhtar Ahmed has, however, stressed that the Board of Technical Education Punjab on 9-10-1986 issued a certificate to the effect that the diploma of Associate Engineering from Government Polytechnic and Diploma in Associate Engineering from Swedish Pakistan Institute of Technology, Gujrat, in Foundry Pattern Making is equivalent to the Diploma in Metallurgy and may be considered on uniform pattern for the purpose of admission to higher classes. This certificate, to say the least, was not available before the authorities of respondent and, therefore, it could not be made the basis of selection on 6-5-1986 or erlier. Therefore, this certificate could not have been considered by respondent No,2.
4. ' Mr. Ata-ur-Rahman, counsel for respondent No,2 has also drawn our attention to the fact that another person namely, Muhammad Shafiq has applied for the same seat on the basis of a certificate issued in his favour which showed that he had secured 4,292 marks out of 6,000 and he had exactly the same qualification which the petitioner has namely, Diploma in Mechanical production with Specialization in Foundry and that Muhammad Shafiq is evidently preferable to the petitioner in case the certificates of Muhammad Shafiq and the petitioner as well as that of Imdad Hussain were treated at the same level. He, therefore, contended that Muhammad Shafiq had a better right of admission than that of the petitioner. However we do not find it necessary to comment on this situation as Muhammad Shafiq is not before us. We do not find any thing wrong in the selection made by respondent No,2 on 6-5-1986 and, therefore, this petition is found to be without merit and is hereby dismissed in limine. However, we are B quite sanguine that in case the petitioner applies next year for the same seat and he is found having better marks, then explanation offered by the Punjab Board of Technical Education will be given due consideration by the College Authorities. In fact Mr. Ata-ur-Rehman has stated that it would be so.