AMIR-UL-HULK MENGAL, J.--- This petition arises out of the following facts:-- '
1. The petitioner is a domicile of Quetta. He obtained his primary education from Quetta and studied uptill 9th class in Sandeman High School, Quetta. However, in the year 1990 he left for Gujranwala, in order to look after his grandfather who had fallen ill on account of paralysis. He passed his matriculation examination from Gujranwala obtaining 720 marks. According to him his grandfather expired on 22-5-1990.
2. After passing his matriculation from Board of Intermediate & Secondary Education, Gujranwala he got admission in the Government College Lahore. In the year 1992 he passed his F.Sc. From Lahore obtaining 740 marks. He came back to Quetta and applied for a seat in the Bolan Medical College for the session 1992-93.
3. The Selection Committee constituted for the purpose interviewed the petitioner and asked him to disclose the reasons .About his passing of matriculation and Intermediate exams from outside the Province of Balochistan. The reason assigned by the petitioner was that he had gone there for getting better education. The Selection Committee was of the view that the reason assigned by the petitioner was not cogent and genuine, therefore, his application for admission was rejected under para. 29 of the Admission Policy of Bolan Medical College during the academic session 1992-93.
Feeling aggrieved from the order of the Selection Committee, the petitioner has challenged the same through present Constitutional petition.
4. Heard Ch. Muhammad Yousaf, Advocate for the petitioner, learned Advocate-General Balochistan for Government of Balochistan, Mr. M.S. Rakhshani, Advocate for respondent No. 2, Mr. Shakil Ahmad, Advocate for Respondent No. 3 and Mr. Tariq Mehmobd, Advocate for respondent No. 4.
5. Various legal and Constitutional points were raised by Ch. Muhammad Yousaf, Advocate which shall be attended to by us at the proper stage of the judgment. However, as far as the facts are concerned it was contended by the learned counsel that the reason for the petitioner to leave Quetta for Gujranwala was the illness of his grandfather. In para. 19 of the petition the reason assigned by the petitioner for taking education from outside was on account of the circumstances beyond his control as he had to sacrifice and abandon his studies at Quetta to look after his grandfather at Gujranwala. It may be noted that the statement of father of the petitioner before the Selection Committee has also been annexed along with the petition from which it is revealed that grandfather of the petitioner was not living alone and his remaining brothers, uncles and aunts were also settled at Punjab who could easily look after their ailing father. It may further be noted that in the said statement father of the petitioner stated about the illness of grandfather of petitioner but simultaneously he stated that grandfather of the petitioner had invited petitioner to Gujranwala and got him admitted in 10th class. Thus from this statement it is revealed that the reason for discontinuing education at Quetta was not the illness of the grandfather of the petitioner. It is also revealed that all the uncles of the petitioner have got landed property in Punjab.
Thus in the circumstances contention that petitioner had gone under compulsion by sacrificing his studies at Quetta to look after his grandfather was afterthought, and not tenable. In fact, the petitioner had left Quetta to get education in Punjab. Thus prima facie the observations made by the Selection Committee appear to be unexceptionable in view of para. 29 of the Admission Policy.
6. However, main challenge from the petitioner's counsel was that Rule 29 of the Admission Policy is unreasonable, discriminatory and against the fundamental rights of the citizens curtailing the choice of a student to study at a particular place by putting an embargo to the students to necessarily take education in the Province of Balochistan. This clause, therefore, was negation of the rights provided by the Constitution and requires to be struck down. The second limb of the arguments in this regard was that in absence of any criteria for satisfaction of the Selection Committee, it has been noted that Selection Committee discriminates in genuine cases by rejecting on baseless ground a candidate and granting admission to the other under similar circumstances. Therefore, it was argued that the Selection Committee has been empowered to make arbitrary decisions.
7. In order to appreciate the contentions so raised before us, it would be proper and necessary to reproduce para. 29 of the Admission Policy:-- "The candidate must have passed Matriculation and Intermediate Examination from Balochistan unless the candidate could satisfy the Selection Committee with cogent reasons' for not studying in Balochistan for claiming exemption from this condition."
8. The Selection Committee under para. 29 has been empowered to reject application for admission of a candidate in case he has studied outside the Province but failed to assign cogent and good reasons to the satisfaction of the Selection Committee.
9. The object of incorporating the aforementioned clause in the Admission Policy seems to be to protect the rights of students studying in this Province enabling them to get admission in the sole institution i.e Bolan Medical College as apparently students of Province of Balochistan do not have better institutions and better opportunities as compared to the similar institutions in the rest of the country. This has been done with a view to bring at par the students of this backward area with the rest of the country. However, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that Government is of course competent to regularise the Admission Policy of Bolan Medical College because it is an institution which is staffed and run by the Government of Balochistan. But if the Government intends to resort to Article 22(4) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan then this policy should be for `advancement' of the education in the province. According to learned counsel by taking admission in a better institution of the country he object of advancement in education is promoted and not curtailed. Thus, a domicile or a local student pf the Province who can afford and succeed in getting admission in a better educational institution out of the Province, it would not negate the `advancement' and such a student should not be debarred to get admission in Bolan Medical College on the sole ground that he has taken education from outside the Province. It was emphatically urged that this para, in the Admission Policy is exactly the reverse of the provision as contained in Article 22(4) of the Constitution, for the simple reason that by dint of this provision the concept of advancement of education is whittled down. According to learned counsel circumventing the right of a student to take education from any educational institution of high repute negates the concept as envisaged in Article 22 of the Constitution. Similarly it was argued that this para. Is in contravention of Article 25 and the equality clause of the Constitution. Reliance has been placed on PLD 1990 SC 295 wherein Articles 25 and 22 of the Constitution were interpreted. As regards Article 25 it was held that classification based on intelligible and reasonable standards is permissible within the framework of Article 25 on the ground of sex and sex alone. Regarding Article 25 read with Article ; 22 the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that both Articles (25 and 22) have to be read harmoniously there being no repugnancy between them. It was further held that no discrimination on the ground of sex alone can be permitted except on the ground of reasonable and intelligible classification. It was further held that there is no repugnancy between Article 25 and Article 22 and the two had to be read harmoniously. It was also settled that while interpreting Constitution and giving effect to various legislative measures one distinction has to be consistently kept in view that classification based on reasonable consideration is permissible and not violative of the principle. It may further be noted that in these petitions, the basic principle was regarding admission of the girls who were otherwise qualified to be admitted in different colleges but were denied admission on the sole ground of sex. However, in the petition in hand the question is not related to sexes of the candidates. In the Province of Balochistan the girls are allowed to compete boys on merits. Besides there are certain reserved seats for the girls.
However, while interpreting the Constitution on page 309 of PLD 1990 SC 295 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held:-- "All pervasive nature of this Constitutional provision is self-evident. In interpreting Constitution and also in giving effect to the various legislative measures,, one distinction has to be consistently kept in view and it is that classification based on reasonable considerations is permissible and not violative of the principle."
The question for determination, therefore, would be whether the classification as made in para. 29 of the Admission Policy is based on reasonable and intelligible considerations or not. There is no denying the fact that Bolan Medical College is an institution which is staffed and run by the Government of Balochistan, as such the Government has the competency to regulate the Admission Policy of the said institution. From perusal of the policy it appears that the distribution of the seats in the said institution is regularised by the admission policy wherein the Government has devised a policy of Provincial merit seats, district seats, special seats for children of doctors etc. It is revealed ex-facie that the purpose for devising such a Policy was to take care of those students who study in far-flung areas of the Province in institutions which otherwise cannot compete similar institutions in the rest of the country. As such in order to bring them at par and giving them admission in professional colleges like Bolan Medical College the Government has incorporated clause 29 of the Admission Policy with the view to protect the right of admission of those students who get education in far-flung areas in circumstances which are not congenial as compared to those institutions which are well established in the rest of the country. However, those genuine local or domicile students of this Province who could satisfy the Selection Committee regarding their taking education outside the Province have also been allowed to take admission in Bolan Medical College. Thus it is evident that as far as competency of the Government to make Rules relating the admission policy of Bolan Medical College is concerned it is vested with the Government because the said institution is being staffed and run with the funds provided by the Government of Balochistan. However, the dispute to be resolved in the instant petition is whether denying admission to those students who have studied and passed Matriculation and F.Sc. From outside the Province is based on reasonable and intelligible grounds, The words used in this regard in para. 29 of the Admission Policy are that the candidate must have passed Matriculation and Intermediate Examination from Balochistan unless he could satisfy the Selection Committee with cogent reasons for not studying in Balochistan for claiming exemption from this condition. This condition has been imposed with the object to give more facilities to those students who studied in the Province so that such students may get admission in the sole professional institution in the medical field of this Province. However, simultaneously a discretion has been left with the Selection Committee to allow admission to those students who have passed Matriculation and F.Sc.
Examination from outside the Province to get admission in Bolan Medical College if they could assign cogent reasons for not studying in the Province. Thus it cannot be reasonably inferred that this clause in the admission policy is not based on intelligible or reasonable considerations. As such the classification based in view of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court as mentioned hereinabove (PLD 1990 SC page 295) is permissive because it is based on intelligible and reasonable considerations.
Adverting now to the next limb of argument in this regard is that a student getting education outside the Province should necessarily get a seat provided he should have passed Matriculation and F.Sc. From an established institution, it may be held that it is not advancement of an individual student, but the advancement of the students as a class which has been kept in mind by the Government. Therefore, we do not find any substance in the arguments advanced by Chaudhary Muhammad Yousaf that this clause in the Admission Policy negates the spirit of Article 22(4) of the Constitution.
From the above discussion we have come to the conclusion that para.29 of the Admission Policy of Bolan Medical College is not violative of principles laid down in Article 25 or Article 22(4) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Besides the aforementioned points raised. In support and against the petition it was argued that the petition is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary parties. Mr. Karim Bakhsh, respondent No. 4 in the counter-affidavit contended that in case the petition is allowed one Shazia Rehman would lose her seat from district quota as she obtained 736 marks as against 760 marks obtained by the petitioner but she was not made a party. Be that as it may since we have also rejected the main grounds urged in support of the petition, therefore, these technical grounds do not require serious consideration.
Adverting now to the second main question that Selection Committee has been empowered with arbitrary authority to reject a student who fails to satisfy it for passing his .Matriculation or F.Sc.
Examinations from outside the Province. It may be observed in this respect that if the Selection Committee in fact, mis-exercises such authority, then cases of like nature are always amenable to be challenged in Constitutional jurisdiction which has been practice throughout. However, to say that such powers are arbitrary is not convincing for the reason that there might be genuine cases where students are compelled to study outside the Province for cogent reasons and in case the Selection Committee lacks competence to consider genuine cases it will be, too, unjust. It is for this reason that discretionary powers have been granted to Selection Committee to allow genuine cases and it is always expected that forums like Selection Committee exercise jurisdiction judiciously and not arbitrarily. If, however, any discrimination or arbitrariness is reflected from such decision the same has always been rectified in Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court on an application moved by an aggrieved person.
Summarizing the discussion, the petitioner has failed to establish on merits that he got education from outside the Province for reasonable grounds as such we see no force in this petition which is hereby dismissed. However, we leave the parties to bear their own costs.