1. ' JAVID IQBAL J.--The background in which this appeal was filed is that appellant Majid Latif applied for admission to Bolan Medical College for the academic year 1984-85 against one of the seats reserved for District Pishin. The admission was refused on the ground that the domicile certificate issued in the name of the appellant's father reflected that he was domicile of Quetta and not Chaman. The appellant challenged this decision by way of a writ petition but this writ petition was withdrawn by learned counsel for the appellant on the ground that he would seek admission in the next academic session. Thereafter, the appellant again sought admission for the academic year 1986-87 but this time objection was filed against his candidature by respondent No. 4 Syed Liaqat Ali Khan to which a detailed reply was submitted by the appellant. The matter was referred to the Selection Committee for reverification and in the light of the report of the Deputy Commissioner Pishin dated 7th September, 1986 the Selection Committee rejected the appellant's application in March, 1987. This order was also challenged by the appellant by way of writ petition but the Baluchistan High Court dismissed the same on the ground that the appellant nor his father was in possession of any domicile certificate from Pishin District.
2. ' It may be pointed out that Quetta-Pishin District was one prior to its separation in 1974. The Selection Committee was of the view that the appellant should possess domicile certificate from District Magistrate Pishin but as he or his father did not possess it, he did not fulfil the condition of eligibility for admission of one of the reserved scats for Pishin District. This decision was taken in accordance with paragraph 28 of the Prospectus of the Bolan Medical College which emphasised the requirement of domicile certificate for candidates seeking admission. Under this provision a candidate was expected to produce either a local certificate issued by the Deputy Commissioner or District Magistrate of the respective district or a domicile certificate issued by the District Magistrate under the Pakistan Citizenship Act and the Rules made thereunder.
3. ' In the instant case a domicile certificate dated 17th November, 1971 was issued to the father of the appellant before the division of the Quetta-Pishin District. His father applied in 1984 for the correction of the certificate before the Assistant Commissioner praying that in the column showing place of domicile, Chaman he substituted for Quetta. The application was forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner Pishin, but the Deputy Commissioner Pishin sent it to the Deputy Commissioner Quetta on the ground that since the domicile certificate previously issued to the appellant's father was by the District Magistrate Quetta-Pishin District, the case was forwarded to him for further necessary action. Eventually the domicile certificate was corrected and the place of domicile was changed from Quetta to Chaman by the District Magistrate Quetta on 10th October, 1985. However, since despite the same the Selection Committee had rejected the application for admission to the Bolan Medical College of the appellant, he had challenged the decision before the High Court of Baluchistan but his writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the District Magistrate Quetta was not competent to issue domicile certificate for another district.
4. Leave to appeal in this case was granted on the ground that under Rule 28-B of.The Pakistan Citizenship Rules 1952 which provided for the correction of any particulars in a domicile certificate, the authority which had granted the original certificate alone was empowered to pass necessary orders in the matter of correction and that since in the instant case as the correction had been made in the original domicile certificate of the appellant's father by the District. Magistrate Quetta, he was the only competent authority to do so under the above Rule and that the Deputy Commissioner or the District Magistrate Pishin had no power to do so.
5. At the time of the hearing of the appeal the learned Advocate-General Baluchistan Mr. Yaqub K.
6. Eusafzai stated before us that since the appellant had been granted provisional admission to the Bolan Medical College Quetta at the time of the granting of leave order and that also since respondent No. 4 who had raised objection to his admission, were now both studying in the second year of the college, he was not interested in opposing this appeal which in the peculiar circumstances of the case may be allowed.
7. In the light of this statement of the learned Advocate-General this appeal is allowed but there shall be no order as to costs.