The brief facts giving rise to this petition are that Dr. Amtul Razzaq Sami, the petitioner was working as Registrar, Surgical Unit No. 1, in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. Lahore. She had brilliant academic record and had obtained six gold medals during her studies into Medical College. She was awarded the M.B.,B.S. degree in the convocation held in the College on 29-2-1988 in which the then Prime Minister of Pakistan was the chief guest. He was impressed by the petitioner's academic brilliance and offered that she may go for higher studies in America, England or in any other country and that the Government of Pakistan will bear all the necessary expenses for her studies abroad. In pursuance of the announcement made by the then Prime Minister a Telex message was sent to the Chief Secretary, Government of the Punjab which reads as under:-- "DURING THIS ADDRESS AT THE CONVOCATION OF FATIMA JINNAH MEDICAL COLLEGE, LAHORE ON THE 29 FEBRUARY 1988 THE PRIME MINISTER WAS PLEASED TO DIRECT THAT MISS AMTUL RAZAQ SAMI ADJUDGED AS THE BEST GRADUATE OF THE COLLEGE FOR 1987 BE SENT ABROAD AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSES FOR A POST--GRADUATE COURSE AFTER NECESSARY TRAINING IN PAKISTAN(.) NECESSARY ACTION MAY PLEASE BE TAKEN TO IMPLEMENT THE ABOVE DIRECTIVE AND COMPLIANCE REPORTED TO THIS SECRETARIAT IMMEDIATELY FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE PRIME MINISTER(.)"
The petitioner completed her house job and on the recommendation of the Principal of he College the Ministry of Health wrote a letter for processing the petitioner's case in the light of the Prime Minister's announcement. The Provincial Government sanctioned a sum of Rs.14,330 as return fare from Lahore to London via Islamabad as is evident from the letter dated 8-6-1988 (Annexure 'H').
The petitioner applied to the Government for grant of scholarship for joining the F.R.C.S course inTH the Nuffield College of Surgical Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons, London. The reply received from the Government was to the effect that the financial year was going to end in the month of June and the amount of scholarship could not be arranged during the said financial year, i.e. 1988-
89. It was stated in para. 2 of the letter dated 28-6-1988: "As the Health Department Punjab, has already paid you the air ticket, you are allowed to join the course at King College, London. However, whenever the funds will be made available after reappropriation in the next financial , year, budget of Health Division, you will be paid." Accordingly, the petitioner proceeded to London and joined the F.R.C.S. course in the College. The Government paid a sum of Rs.1,57,700 by way of expenses for the first year. However, thereafter, no payment was made and the petitioner was obliged to complete the course at her own expenses. It is significant to mention that when the petitioner had joined the London College she received a letter dated .17-7-1989 from Pakistan Embassy in which was stated that the petitioner was sent by the Government of Pakistan for F.R.C.S. and that all the expenses for F.R.C.S., Part it, including the tuition fee, will be borne by this Embassy. However, the said commitment was not honouree: obliging the petitioner to send a petition to the Government of Pakistan for paying the necessary expenses of her studies. Her request was turned down by the Government vide letter dated 20-2 -1990 (Annexure ' O' ).
2. On behalf of the petitioner the case was argued by her father Dr. Abdul Sami who urged that the petitioner after completing her M.B.,B.S. studies had joined service in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital and did not have sufficient financial resources to go abroad for higher studies. It was the offer made by the Prime Minister of Pakistan for bearing the necessary expenses of the petitioner's studies abroad for her post-graduate course which prompted the petitioner to leave her job and go to London for higher studies. The Government had undertaken to bear all the necessary expenses till the completion of the course. He submits that the scholarship offered to the petitioner was not merely for one year but was meant for the completion of the F.R.C.S. course. The Pakistan Embassy had also confirmed that the Government will pay all the necessary expenses of the petitioner's tuition fee, etc. for F.R.C.S. Part II. Now, the Government cannot back out from its commitment. He submits further that the refusal of the Government to bear the necessary expenses for the petitioner's studies in respect of the F.R.C:S. Part II caused great embarrassment and financial hardship to the petitioner. She somehow managed to continue her studies and is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.7,12,928 from the Government. The details of the expenses are embodied in the chart submitted by the petitioner.
3. On the other hand, learned Deputy Attorney-General submits that the Prime Minister had made a commitment to bear the petitioner's expenses for her post-graduate studies abroad and the selection of the course was to be made by the petitioner. She joined the F.R.C.S. course and necessary expenses for the first year were paid by the Government. He adds that normally the candidates complete the remaining studies in Pakistan and then go to appear in the examination in U.K. The petitioner is to be blamed for remaining at U.K. throughout. The Government was under no obligation to bear the expenses for her stay abroad for Part II of the course.
4. The material on the record clearly establishes that the offer of scholarship to the petitioner made by Government was for completion of the F.R.C.S course abroad. There is nothing to show that the scholarship was limited to studies for abroad for one year only.. Left to herself, the petitioner had no intention to go abroad for higher studies. It was only the offer of scholarship made by the tlVen Prime Minister/Government of Pakistan that the petitioner decided to go abroad for post-graduate studies. She opted to get admission in the Nuffield College of Surgical Science, Royal College of Surgeons, London for F.R.C.S. course. The Government paid return fare to her as well as fee expenses amounting to Rs.1-57.700 for the, first year. She was reassured vide letter dated 17-7-1989 sent by the Pakistan Embassy that all the expenses including tuition fee etc. for the F.R.C.S Part II shall be borne by the Embassy. Thereafter, there was no legal iustification for the Government to back-out from its solemn commitment. The Government is supposed to be a fair litigant and ought not to take shelter beyond technicalities merely to secure dismissal of the petition. The Government ought to show grace in fulfilling its solemn commitment made with a talented doctor of the country. The argument of her learned Deputy Attorney-General that normally the candidates study abroad for one year and then complete the remaining studies pertaining to the F.R.C.S course in Pakistan and then go to appear in the examination in U.K has not impressed me. Before the petitioner left for U.K, she was never intimated that the Government would pay her expenses and tuition fee only for one year. On the contrary, the original commitment which was subsequently reaffirmed by the letter of the Pakistan Embassy dated 17-7-1989 was for payment of all the expenses for completion of 'the course. Even in the letter No. 705/88-MER dated 20-5-1989 from the Ministry of Health, Special Education and Social Welfare (Health Division) to the Accountant --General Pakistan regarding the President's sanction for release of Rs.1,58,000 for transferring the same to the account of Pakistan Embassy London for payment to the petitioner, does not indicate that the same was the final payment and that all other expenses for the subsequent years were to be borne by the petitioner. Admittedly, the F.R.C.S course had to be completed within the period of 3 years and the Government was bound to- pay all the necessary expenses for the petitioner's fees and her stay abroad. The petitioner passed her primary F.R.C.S examination both from the Royal College of Surgeons, London and Royal College of Surgeons, Glasgow..
Therefore, the Medical Councillor of Embassy of Pakistan made a recommendation vide his letter dated 7-7-1989 that the petitioner be allowed multiple entry visa from 1-7-1989 up to 2-5-1992 so that she may complete her F.R.C.S course. Accordingly, she was granted visa for the period mentioned in the letter of the Medical Councillor. However, it is unfortunate that the petitioner was not paid the necessary expenses and she was obliged to arrange the same through her own private sources. The petitioner's representation for payment of the necessary expenses in respect of her studies for F.R.C.S. Part II was arbitrarily rejected by the Government vide the letter/order dated 20-2-1990. The contents of the said letter appear to be miles away from the path of honesty and fairness. It was wrongly stated in the said letter that the petitioner was granted scholarship for primary post-graduate studies. In fact, she was clearly granted scholarship for her post-graduate studies/F.R:C.S course abroad. The letter also refers to the-Government "polity" according to which it was not mandatory for the petitioner to study in London for F.R.C.S Part II. No such policy decision was ever conveyed to the petitioner calling upon her to return to Pakistan. On the contrary, as mentioned above the letter dated 17-7-1989 from the Pakistan Embassy affirmed that the petitioner had been sent by the Government of Pakistan for F.R.C.S Part II and that all the expenses including tuition fee will be paid by the Embassy. The letter went on to state, "the training period in London does not involve any expenditure except the expenditure for boarding and lodging for the candidate which can be met out by doing job in any Hospital".
Whether the expenditure could be met by the petitioner by doing some job in a Hospital, was hardly relevant. The relevant thing was the obligation of the Government to bear all the necessary expenses till the completion of the course.
5. The petitioner has claimed an expenditure amounting to Rs.7,12,928. for two years relating to F.R.C.S Part II. The respondents have not specifically controverted the claim, on facts. However, I feel that the petitioner's entire claim cannot be allowed in the absence of the necessary documents.
The Government had originally sanctioned a sum of Rs.1,57,700 for one year and it would be fair and reasonable to allow the same amount to the petitioner. Hence for her two years stay abroad for completing the F.R.C.S Part II, the petitioner B is entitled to get an amount of Rs.3,15,400 from the Government. The respondents are directed to take the necessary steps for payment of the above amount to the petitioner within a period of two months after the receipt of the order. The petition is allowed in terms of the above order, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.