' MUHAMMAD ISHAQ KHAN, J.--Relevant facts under which the present Constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 arises are as follows:-- ' Dr. Zebun Nisa, petitioner, is possessed of academic qualifications of M.B.,B.S. From the University of Peshawar in 1962, DCP(London) from the University of London in Four Modules i.e Histopathology, Haematology, Microbiology and Chemical Pathology in 1970 and D.Path (England) in 1970. She was awarded on successful completion of a rigorous course in Four Modules (subjects) the DCP (London) under the Old Regulations, Histopathology, Haematology, Microbiology and Chemical Pathology in one year. Under the current Regulations each Module of the DCP takes half an year to compete i.e it takes a minimum of 2 years now to complete all the Four Modules. The petitioner was awarded her Diploma in Clinical Pathology (DCP) by the University of London on completion of her Course under the Old Regulations covering Four Modules in one year which is superior to DCP obtained under the new Regulations in Two Modules. She has been teaching right from 1962 till date to under-graduate and post-graduate students on Pathology and has Diagnostic laboratory experience in all the sub-specialities in Pathology. She received a letter from the Principal Khyber Medical College, Peshawar on or about 12-7-1989 calling upon her to furnish her documents mentioned in the said letter for submission of the same for her promotion case to the post of the Professor in the Department of Pathology. This letter was followed by another letter dated 25-71989 on the same subject. Accordingly the petitioner submitted her documents but at that time the case for registration of petitioner's post-graduate qualification as "medium qualification" was under consideration by Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (hereinafter to be called the P.M.D.C.) and since the decision by its Recognition Committee was expected shortly, therefore, the petitioner made a request that her case for promotion may be finalised after the finalisation of her case by the P.M.D.C. It was further submitted that the P.M.D.C. Had earlier declined to recognize petitioner's post-graduate qualification DCP(London), D. Path (England) as Medium Qualification per its Letter No, PF-1-G-87 (SON)/8502, dated 25th January, 1988. The refusal was purportedly based on the ground that she was awarded Diploma in Clinical Pathologic on attending her courses in one academic year (according to Old Regulations). She further submitted that the refusal by the P.M.D.0 was wholly misconceived on the ground that DCP in Four Subjects mentioned above under the Old Regulations was rigorous course of high academic standing in every respect equivalent to M.F'hil Degree in terms of the breadth of material covered and it was much more demanding then most current M.Sc. Courses in Pathology. She further submitted that in a similar case Academic Registrar of the University of London was pleased to write to one Dr. Shamim Akhtar that "all Master's Degrees awarded by the. University of London are of equal standing regardless of the subject or the length of the course of study". Minor diplomas under the PMDC Rules are equated to M.C.P.S. DCP (London) under their Old Regulations is also being treated by the P.M.D.C. As minor diploma equivalent to M.C.P.S (Pak). As the University of London has the highest standard in the world and the DCP is considered by the London University itself as major Diploma, therefore, it cannot be equated to M.C.P.S which has no regular course or admission but is merely an examination. Ultimately the petitioner wrote to the Secretary, Pakistan Medical and Dental Council to reconsider her case for registration of her postgraduate qualification as equal to M.Phil(Pak) vide application dated 25-7-1989. The petitioner received a letter dated 20-9-1989 from the Secretary P.M.D.0 to the effect that her case will be reconsidered by the Recognition Committee of the Council in its meeting on 25-9-1989 and petitioner was asked to make her personal appearance before the said Committee. Accordingly, the petitioner appeared before the Committee but they refused to register her qualification accordingly. Petitioner was further told that an official communication to this effect would be sent to her shortly which has not been done so far forcing the petitioner, having no other adequate remedy, to approach this Court for the issuance of an appropriate writ declaring the order of the P.M.D.0 refusing registration of her post-graduate qualification of DCP (London), D.Path(England) as equivalent to M.Phil (Pak) to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
2. Comments, were called from the respondent which were accordingly submitted refuting the allegations of the petitioner contained in the writ petition. On this the petitioner filed a replication to the said para-wise comments.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also gone through the material placed on record.
4. In order to solve the controversy between the parties we should like to revert to certain documentary proof annexed with the petition. First of all we would revert to Section 16 of the Medical and Dental Council Ordinance 'Ordinance No, XXXII of 1962) which runs as under:-- "16. (u>Additional medical qualifications.--(1) The post-graduate medical qualifications granted by medical institutions in or outside Pakistan which are included in the Third Schedule shall be recognised additional medical qualifications for the purposes of this Ordinance.
(2) On the recommendation of the Council, the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, amend the Third Schedule so as to include therein any additional medical qualification in respect of which the Council is satisfied that it is of sufficient standing to warrant its being included therein.
(3) Such notification may also direct that an entry shall be made in the last column of the Third Schedule against such additional medical qualification declaring that it shall be recognised additional medical qualification subject to any specified conditions and only when granted before or after a specified date.
' Now we would see what the Third Schedule attached to this Ordinance says:-- Medical InstitutionRecognised Additional Medical Qualification.Abbreviations for Registration.
London,D.A., DAY. & E.
B. Bact., D.C.H.
Only when grantedafter a training of at least one academic year.) Postgraduate Diplomas Only when granted after a training of at least one academic year.) Postgraduate Diplomas.DA." DAY. & E.
D.Bact., D.C.H.
D.C. M.T., D.C.P.
Against the above 5 postgraduate Colleges.
' We would also like to examine Annexures F, G, H, J, K, L and M of the writ petition. Annexure F is a letter from the respondent to the Principal Khyber Medical College saying that qualification of DCP of Dr.Zebun Nisa can be considered only as minor post-graduate qualification. Annexure-G is a letter from the Registrar of the Royal College of Pathologist London to the petitioner the contents of which are reproduced below:- "As you know the DCP is still in existence and is frequently taken by overseas students as it gives a good overall training in the different disciplines in Pathology. The DCP (four modules) is sufficiently highly regarded by this College to give exemption from our Primary Examination."
' Annexure-H is by the Deputy Secretary Royal Postgraduate Medical School, University of London addressed to the petitioner which runs as under:-- "Thank you for your recent letter. I am sorry that you are experiencing difficulties in obtaining recognition for your Diploma in Clinical Pathology. There is no doubt that the Diploma in Clinical Pathology, under the Old Regulations which required coverage of four subjects, was a rigorous course of high academic standing, in every respect equivalent to an M.Sc. Degree: indeed, in terms of the breadth of material covered, it was much more demanding than most current M.Sc. Courses in Pathology. There is no doubt whatsoever that it should be regarded as a Major Diploma."
' Likewise, Annexure-J is also by the said Deputy Secretary of the said School which lays down:-; "This is to certify that the Diploma in Clinical Patholoty (D.C.P.) of the University of London under the old Regulations in Four Modules, is a Major Diploma and is equivalent both in length and academic standard to an M.Sc. Degree of the University of London."
' Again Annexure-K is by Academic Division University of London in the name of the petitioner saying that the Diploma in Clinical Pathology awarded to her should be regarded as a Major Diploma. The wordings of this Annexure are as follows:-- "I can support the Deputy of the Royal Post-graduate Medical School's statement in his letter to you of 24 September, 1986 that the Diploma in Clinical Pathology which you were awarded should be regarded as a Major Diploma."
' Again we find a certificate by the Deputy Secretary, University of London addressed to the petitioner to the following effect:-- "This is to certify tjaat Dr. Zebun Nisa Qureshi holds the Diploma in Clinical Pathology, University of London, under the Old Regulations in Four Modules. Under the current regulations each Module of the DCP now takes half an academic year to complete; to complete Four Modules of the DCP therefore takes a minimum of two academic years."
' Lastly, Annexure-M from the Academic Registrar University of London in the name of one Dr.S.Akhtar is to the following effect:-- "In response to your letter, I am writing to inform you that all Master's degrees awarded by the University of London are of equal standing regardless of the subject or the length of the course of study."
4. The gist of all the above-referred documents is that the admission to the DCP(London) Course in Four Modules under the Old Regulations was based on very high merit. The prerequisite for admission to the said post was a minimum of two years subject experience/training and one year house job after passing the M.B.,B.S. Examination followed by one year regular rigorous course of very high standard of the University of London. This course obviously was so hard that the University of London later on had split up the said course into two Modules in one year and the Four Modules take minimum of two years to complete. Accordingly, one student is selected from each of the Commonwealth countries and the petitioner was the only candidate selected from Pakistan on the basis of her outstanding and brilliant career as she had topped the final of M.B.,B.S. From Peshawar, topped in each individual subject, got gold medal and Presidential award as per her bio-data annexed with the writ petition. Besides this, she had six years subject experience/training, plus one year house job at the time of her admission. But strangely enough P.M.D.C. Had registered M.R.C.P(UK), F.R.C.S(UK) and F.C.P.S(Pak) as major and one of the highest qualifications higher than M.Phil(Pak) which is registered as Medium qualification. The record shows that the above qualifications have no course at all but are awarded only on passing an examination which can be taken after two and a half years of passing M.B.,B.S. Examination etc. On the basis of practical experience/training as per rules of admission attached with the writ petition. We find that in reply to the letter of the petitioner the Registrar Royal College of Physicians London replied that MRCP was not a course but an examination. This shows that the P.M.D.0 has favoured double standards. On the one hand they register the MRCP (UK) and F.R.C.S. (UK) and FCPS(Pak) as major qualifications which have got no regular course but are granted merely on passing an examination after about 2 and a half years of subject experience/training from the date of passing of the basic qualification of M.B.,B.S. But in the case of DCP (London) Four Modules which was awarded to the petitioner after 3 years subject experience/training, having one year rigorous course of the higher standard of the University of London to which admission is granted on very high merit to only one person from Pakistan, the P.M.D.C. Wrongly interprets this qualification as minor qualification.
5. P.M.D.0 has registered the M.Sc. (London) qualification of one Dr. Qaimuddin equivalent to Medium qualification of M. Phil(Pak) while the M.Sc. (London) of one Dr. Shamim Akhtar as minor qualification. The former had produced some certificates of two years course as part time while Dr.Shamim Akhtar had obtained M.Sc. London in one year rigorous course. Annexures G-19 to M-24 of the writ petition, reproduced in the earlier part of this judgment show the correspondence between the petitioner and the University of London who have supported in each letter that DCP (London) Four Modules (Subjects) was a very high standard and rigorous course, should be regarded as Major qualification (Diploma) as it is much superior. When we see that M.SC. Of one Dr.Qaimuddin has been registered as Medium qualification equal to M.Phil(Pak) and DCP (London) of the petitioner being superior to M.Sc. (London) irrespective of the length of course or the subject, it should be registered if not major qualification at least medium qualification equivalent to M.Phil (Pak). It is on record that the petitioner had also obtained another qualification D.Path(England) from U.K. In the same subject, therefore, these two qualifications have to be registered as major or at least medium qualifications equivalent to M.Phil (Pak) and the stand of the P.M.D.C. By not registering qualifications of the petitioner as major or medium equivalent to M.Phil (Pak) is incorrect and highly unjustified. Once again we would refer to Annexure-G of the writ petition wherein it has been clearly recorded by the Royal College of Pathologist London that DCP (London)
Four Modules under the Old Regulations is highly regarded by them and is exempt from the primary examination of MRCP whereas DCP (London) Two Modules and DCP (Pak) are not exempt from this examination. This show superiority of the said course.
6. From what has been said above, we are of the firm view that the order of P.M.D.C. Refusing registration of the petitioner's post-graduate qualification as . Medium qualification is illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and without lawful authority. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed accordingly.