1. MUKHTAR AHMED JUNEJO, J.---Petitioner Aien Khan Afridi has sought leave to appeal against a judgment dated 12-6-1995 delivered by the Peshawar High Court in Writ Petition No.185/1995.
2. The petitioner was admitted in Khyber Medical College, Peshawar against one of the three seats reserved for students domiciled in Frontier Regions, Peshawar (hereinafter mentioned as F.R.
3. Peshawar) This was in pursuance of an order passed by the Peshawar High Court in Civil Miscellaneous No.1244/94 directing Provincial Selection Committee, Home and Tribal Affairs Department, Government of N.-W.F.P. To send petitioner's name to the Government of Pakistan in the Ministry of State and Frontier Region for consideration on merits. In view of admission of petitioner in said college another student, namely Muhammad Asif Iqbal (Caveator) lost his chance to be admitted to said college. Muhammad Asif Iqbal questioned genuineness of the domicile of the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner, F.R. Peshawar. Under C.M. No.1266/94 Peshawar High Court directed the Deputy Commissioner to initiate the inquiry for checking genuineness of petitioner's domicile. After due inquiry, the Deputy Commissioner found petitioner's domicile certificate to be bogus. On an application having been moved by petitioner's father namely Mir Abbas Khan, a judicial inquiry was conducted by E.A.C-I, Peshawar, who found that father of the petitioner was not a permanent resident of F.R. Peshawar and the domicile certificate was wrongly issued to the petitioner. On the basis of such report, the Deputy Commissioner cancelled the domicile certificate earlier issued to the petitioner. The petitioner challenged in Writ Petition No. 185 of 1995 the order about cancellation of his domicile certificate, but the same was dismissed on 12-6-1995 on basis of the grounds given for dismissal of Writ Petition No.1130 of 1994 earlier filed by the petitioner. Hence this petition.
4. Mr. Jehanzaib Rahim, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued inter alia that a domicile certificate once issued cannot be cancelled on the ground of its having been obtained by fraud or false representation or concealment of any material fact, unless the person responsible for such fraud, false representation or concealment of facts is convicted on such charge, in view of the provisions contained in Rule 26 of Pakistan Citizenship Rules, 1952. It was further argued that the petitioner was not heard before cancellation of his domicile certificate. Lastly, learned counsel placed his reliance on the case of Ghulam Yasin and another v. District Magistrate-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Kalat and .5 others (PLD 1980 Quetta 23) where it was observed that as long as a domicile certificate was not cancelled in accordance with law, it was not open for any authority to exclude it from consideration for whatever reason it might be, because it was right of a citizen to claim a domicile certificate and such claim having once been accepted after due verification cannot be taken away arbitrarily. The points raised require consideration .
5. Consequently leave to appeal is granted to determine the points raised at the Bar.