1. ' SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J.--Petitioner Humayoon Nizami has passed examination of Ordinary Level and Advanced Level from University of Cambridge held under the supervision of Karachi Grammar School. The said examinations are equivalent to Pakistan Intermediate (H.S. C.). Since the petitioner is resident of Karachi and is holder of domicile from Karachi, with the intention of seeking admission in First Year M.B. ,B.S. In Dow Medical College, he applied for equivalence certificate in order to complete all the formalities as prescribed in Rule 13 of the prospectus of Respondent No,3.
2. ' According to the petitioner, It has secured 75% marks by way of conversion of grades into marks on the basis of formula adopted by the University of Karachi (Respondent No,4) in the past years, but to his surprise he has been issued mark sheet by the Equivalence Committee of Respondent No,4 on the basis of old formula but after deducting 15 marks from each grade and for that reason he has been declared ineligible for admission in First Year M.B.,B.S. According to the petitioner formula adopted by Equivalence Committee of. Respondent No,4 without deduction of marks for the purpose of conversion of grades into marks for certificate obtained from British School is as under:- A - 75 B - 65 C - 55 D - 50 ' Another .Grievance of the Petitioner is that Equivalence Committee of Respondent No,4 is unfair and discriminatory in giving another and more liberal rate of conversion of marks to the students who have passed examinations from American Schools described as under:- A - 80 B - 70 C '60 D 50 ' In view of what is stated above, it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that modification in the formula with regard to deduction of 15 marks from each grade at the time of conversion cannot be made applicable retrospectively and should not apply in the case of petitioner because he has a vested right as he has passed examination from Cambridge University keeping in view formula of conversion as was applicable by University of Karachi previously without deduction of 15 marks from each grade.
3. ' In this context written comments have been filed on behalf of Principlal, Dow Medical College (Respondent No,3). Stand is taken in these comments that eligibility of candidate on the basis of equivalence certificate is exclusive function of University of Karachi (Respondent No,4) Medical College follows policy of admission as is laid down by the University. Attention is also drawn to the fact that on page 2 of admission form under para. 1 (h)(v) it is mentioned that "the subjects passed by a candidate should be at least of C Grade" and the same has also been mentioned in the corrigendum No,S.O. (ME) 1-1-AP-11/87 dated 12-2-1988 issued by Health Department, Government of Sind. It may also be mentioned here that Principal of Dow Medical College Professor Muhammad Azam Almani has also filed his own counter-affidavit in which the same stand is taken as has been stated above.
4. ' On behalf of University of Karachi (Respondent No,4) Mr. A H.Zaidi, Deputy Registrar (Academic) has filed counter-affidavit in which stand is taken that petitioner's eligibility to seek admission in Medical College is dependent upon passing the prescribed qualifying examination i.e, "intermediate examination in Science with Physics, Chemistry and Biology" or any other examination recognised as its equivalent. Equivalency is to be determined by Equivalence Committee appointed, which has provided the formula of conversion of grades into marks which has to be followed. Formula so provided has complete cover of law under the provisions of University of Karachi Act. It is denied that petitioner has a vested right and on the other hand f,,,ertinn is made that petitioner had applied for admission on the of equivalence certificate, which was issued to him not for the purpose of getting admission in M.B.,B.S. But for admission to "Biology Group" as specified therein. Further stand is taken that precondition of deduction of 15 marks from each grade is applicable in the case of students who have passed equivalent examination from British and American Schools and seek admission in M.B.,B.S. For the year 1987-88. Reliance on previous formula without deduction of marks does not give a vested right to the petitioner.
5. ' Correct legal position is that University of. Karachi is set up under University of Karachi Act, 1972.
6. Under section 19 of the said Act different authorities are provided such as Senate, Syndicate, Academic Council and various other Boards and Committees. Under section 24 composition of Academic Council has been described to consist of several academicians including Vice- Chancellor as Chairman and Deans, Directors, Principals of Constituent Colleges, University Professors, Teachers and Education Secretary. Powers and duties of academic Council are defined under section 25 to lay down proper standard of instructions, research and examinations and to regulate and promote the Academic life of the University and the Colleges. Amongst several functions, under section 25(2)(c) it is the duty of the Academic Council to regulate the admission of students to the courses of the study and examinations in the University. Under clause (h) of the same subsection it is the duty of the Academic Council to recognise the examinations .Of other Universities or examining bodies as equivalent to the corresponding examinations of the University.
7. Under Chapter 5 of the said Act provisions are made for framing of Statutes, Regulations and Rules for different purposes which are specified in detail. Under section 29(1)(c) Regulations are to be made for the purpose of admission of students to the University and under clause (d) the conditions are to be specified on which students shall be admitted to the courses of examinations of the University and shall become eligible for award of degrees, diplomas and certificates. Perusal of the provisions of the said Act mentioned above clearly shows that Academic Council is competent to frame Regulations with regard to the admission of the students to the courses of studies and examinations in the. University. Section 27 of the said Act further empowers authorities including Academic Council to appoint Committees, as are deemed fit and assign them functions which are in the powers of those authorities. Equivalence Committee has been appointed by the Academic Council under section 27 of the said Act. On 14-2-1987, Equivalence Committee appointed by the Academic Council passed resolution for conversion of grades of British Schools and American Schools for Intermediate Science Examination (Pre-Medical Group) for admission in M.B. ,B.S. First Year Class and further provided therein that from each grade fifteen marks will be deducted.
8. ' It would be pertinent at this stage to mention here the composition of the Equivalence Committee.
9. It is composed of ten members with Professor Dr. Rafiq Ahmed as Chairman alongwith four Deans of Faculties of Science Pharmacy, Medicine and Islamic Studies. Other members are Principal Dow Medical College, Students Adviser, Foreign Students Advisor, Additional Secretary Health and Registrar. Resolution mentioned above passed by Equivalence Committee was approved by Academic Council on 28-2-1987 under Section 25 of the said Act and further approved by Syndicate on 25-4-1987 under section 23 of the said Act. Now under the said Act no guidelines have been laid down for formulating such policies from which it can be implied that Academic Council has full-fledged and unabridged powers to lay down formula for the purpose of conversion of grades of foreign schools into marks for admission to Medical College. From what is stated above it appears that at no stage any forum which has acted or contributed to the passing of resolution or approved it suffered from jurisdictional defect or acted without or in excess of authority. It is held by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Muhammad Hussain Munir and others v. Sikandar and others (PLD 1974 S.C. 139) that when there is jurisdiction to decide a particular matter, then there is- jurisdiction to decide it rightly or wrongly and the fact that decision is incorrect does not render the decision without jurisdiction. In this context reference can be made to the case of Zulfiqar Khan Awan v. Secretary, Industrial and Mineral Development, Govt. Of Punjab and others (1974 SCM R 530).
10. ' Learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to satisfy us that petitioner has a vested right in admission to Medical College on the basis of old formula cf conversion cf grades into marks without deduction of fifteen marks from each grade. It was argued that old formula was laid down in the year 1985 and petitioner kept that in view to pursue further studies for A-Level as such it has become his vested right now to be admitted in Medical College on the basis of that old formula in spite of the fact that it is no more operative and is not being acted upon. The contention is untenable and has no force. No student has a vested right for admission unless pre-conditions laid down for such admissions by competent authorities are fulfilled. Under the said Act, Academic Council is competent to regulate the policy of admissions and can also modify the same from time to time to suit the prevailing conditions. In fact reduction of fifteen marks from each grade for the purpose of conversion is part of new formula. In support of this proposition reference can be made to the case of Muhammad Siddique v. Secretary, Govt. Of Punjab (1987 SCM R 302) in which Supreme Court has held that notification competently issued relating to question of policy cannot be challenged and the petitioner cannot claim a vested right in any policy. In the instant case marks have been deducted only for the purpose of admission in Medical College, where there is very heavy rush and acute competition of students for admission particularly when a limited number of seats is - available. University has, therefore, acted within its right and authority and no exception can be taken to the change of formula. Petitioner has applied for admission in the year 1987 and he is required to fulfil pre-conditions which are prescribed for admission in the year 1987.
11. Petitioner cannot take objection to the additional precondition of deduction of marks, which is not contrary to the powers and authority of the University. Petitioner shall have vested right only when he gets admission after fulfilling all the pre-conditions and not before that. In this context reference can be made to the case of Naim Mirza v. Government of Sind and others (1987 CLC 1487).
12. ' It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that there are three tiers namely, Equivalence Committee, Academic Council and Syndicate and some members of these three forums are common as such their composition is illegal and highly questionable. It was incorrectly thought by the learned counsel that against decision of Equivalence Committee, appeal was competent before Academic Council and revision was competent before Syndicate. This is not so. There is no question of appeal or revision in the matter of laying down policy with regard to admissions.
13. Academic Council created Equivalence Committee, which passed resolution, which was approved by Academic Council and then was approved by Syndicate to attain finality. All these forums have acted within the limits of their jurisdiction and authority. There is no deviation from any guidelines laid down by any other authority under the four corners of the University of Karachi Act. In the circumstances, it can be said without fear of contradiction that forums mentioned above have acted within their rights and authority and no exception can be taken to the change of formula laid down for the purpose of admission to the Medical College.
14. ' It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that before change of formula petitioner should have been heard and show-cause notice should have been issued and in support some case-law was also cited. As discussed above, we are satisfied that petitioner has no vested right in the admission unless he fulfils the requirements which are competently and lawfully prescribed. Since there is no vested right, question of show cause-notice does not arise.
15. ' In the memorandum of petition comparative study is made between the American system and British system in order to show that course in the British system takes longer time than in American system and is harder as such University of Karachi has discriminated in favour of American course by giving more marks at the time of conversion than given for British course. We do not want to go in a this controversy for three reasons. Firstly, it is for an individual to make a choice between two system after consideration of advantages and disadvantages in the two systems with which the respondents impleaded in this petition have no concern whatsoever. Secondly, nobody is impleaded as a party to represent American system to give necessary reply of the criticism. Thirdly, this matter could have been raised before the Equivalence Committee where both local students and foreign students were represented by their Advisers.
16. ' It was pointed out by Mr. Rehanul Hasan Farooqui representing University of Karachi (respondent No,4) that the petitioner applied for Equivalence certificate for the purpose of taking admission in Biology Group which is different from admission in Medical College, as such he was issued certificate without deduction of 15 marks in each grade for the purpose of conversion. Petitioner knowingly approached respondents Nos.2 and 3 for admission in M.B.,B.S Class by misusing Equivalence certificate which was meant exclusively for use for the purpose of admission to Biology Group. In this context Mr. Farooqui has drawn our attention to letter dated 16th February, 1988 sent by Principal, Dow Medical College addressed to Deputy Registrar (Academic), University of Karachi for issuance of fresh Equivalence certificate as students named therein including petitioner had applied for admission in M.B.,B.S. On the basis of Equivalence certificate issued to them for Biology Group.
17. ' During the hearing of the petition, it was pointed out that Government of Sind through Health Secretary has advertised in the newspapers, policy for admission omitting mention of deduction of 15 marks from each grade for the purpose of conversion of grades into marks at the time of applying for equivalence certificate. In this respect, Mr. Rehanul Hassan Farooqui made a statement before the Court after seeking proper instructions from concerned respondent that formula of conversion of marks with deduction of 15 marks in respect of equivalence certificate relating to University of Karachi remained intact and very much applicable and mention was not made in the advertisement about it for the reason that advertisement covered admissions in all the Medical Colleges throughout Sind and formula challenged in the petition relates to only University of Karachi.
18. ' For the facts and reasons mentioned above, we are satisfied that there is no merit in this petition, which is hereby dismissed.