MAMOON KAZI, J.---This judgment will dispose of Civil Appeal No.773 of 1993 and other connected appeals which have arisen, by leave of this Court, from the judgment passed by the Peshawar High Court dated 21-12-1992.
2. The facts of the case have already been noted in the leave granting order of this Court dated 31- 10-1993 which are reproduced as under:-- "The background of the matter in issue, more or less admitted is that the petitioners qualified M.D.
Examination in or about the year 1988 from Kabul University and their degrees were duly endorsed by the Embassy of Pakistan and recognised by World Health Organization. On return to Pakistan they approached the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') for registration. The respondent had constituted a sub-committee which interviewed the petitioners once at Hayat Abad, Peshawar and for the second the by the Standing Recognition Committee at Islamabad, whereafter they were informed individually that their cases have been approved for provisional registration and that registration certificates will be issued to them in due course of the, after fulfilling necessary formalities.
However, provisional certificates were issued to them on the basis of which they carried out house jobs and were able to secure certificates from the concerned authorities. Later on certain posts of doctors were advertised by the Public Service Commission and on the basis of their provisional recognition the petitioners submitted applications, but to their dismay, they were not entertained on the ground that they had only been permitted for supervisory practice and were not qualified to complete for the jobs advertised. In the meantime a notification was issued by the respondent notifying P.M.D.C. Registration Examination and the' petitioners were called upon to appear before the Board constituted for the purpose if they were interested in registration. Hence the petitioners filed the writ petitions seeking declaration that they are possessed of M.D. Degrees from the world recognized Kabul University, Afghanistan and that the order of the respondent compelling them to appear before the Registration Examination Board is without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
They were dismissed through the impugned orders and hence the instant petitions for leave to appeal. "
3. In the background of the circumstances of the case as stated in the leave granting order the case of the respondent before the High Court was that the notification dated 25-2-1991 regarding holding of Registration Examination by the respondent was issued with a view to evaluate the knowledge and professional competency of the appellants and also to check the genuineness of the degrees obtained by them and, therefore, eligibility certificates had been issued to the appellants alongwith others to sit in the examination to prove their capability.
4. The main thrust of the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellants before the High Court as well as this Court was that once provisional registration certificates were issued to the appellants a vested right had been created in their favour which could not be taken by the respondent. The second contention was that the conditions could not be imposed prior to the grant of the registration certificate, specific reference to which cannot be found either in section 14 and 15 of the Medical Council (Ordinance No.XXXII of 1962).
5. Both the contentions did not find favour with the learned Judges of the High Court. It was held by them that the appellants could not claim registration as a matter of right and under the said provisions of the said Ordinance conditions could be imposed by the respondent before the fulfillment of which the appellants could not be deemed to possess qualifications recognized as medical qualifications for the purpose of Ordinance XXXII of 1962.
6. Leave was granted by this Court to consider whether the appellants had been discriminated against because a contention had been raised that such doctors who had obtained degrees in 1987 had been favoured under similar situation with registration certificates without any test. The questions raised vis-a-vis of the said provisions of the Ordinance also required further examination.
7. After hearing Mr. Raza A. Khan and Khawaja M. Zia Nayyer learned counsel for the appellants and the respondent respectively we find that the order of the High Court is not open to exception.
Admittedly the degree obtained by the appellants from Kabul was not recognized in Pakistan.
According to section 12 of Ordinance XXXII of 1962, only those medical qualifications granted by medical institutions outside Pakistan which are included in the Second Schedule to the said Ordinance are to be recognized as medical qualifications for the purpose of the said Ordinance.
Admittedly the degrees obtained by the appellants were not included in the said Schedule.
Sections 14 and 15 of the said Ordinance reliance upon which has been placed by the learned counsel for the appellants provide as follows:-- ---14. The Central Government. After consulting the Council, may, thinks fit, direct that a medical qualification granted by an institution in a State or country outside Pakistan shall be recognised, for such period and upon such conditions as may be specified in the direction, were mentioned in the Second Schedule notwithstanding the fact that a reciprocal scheme of recognition has not been entered into between the Council and such authority in the State or country as is referred to in subsection (1) of section 13.
15. If the Council is satisfied that a person is, by reasons of qualifications granted by a medical institution outside Pakistan, not included in the Second Schedule, and of experience gained in any part of Pakistan, possessed of qualifications which entitle him to be recognised as possessed of sufficient medical qualifications for the purposes of this Ordinance, it may, with the approval of the Central Government, certify that the person was possessed of such qualifications; and, on such certification by the Council, the person shall be deemed to be possessed of qualifications which are recognised medical qualifications for the purposes of this Ordinance for such period and upon such conditions as may be specified by the Council in, this behalf.--- As is indicated by section 14, it enables the Federal Government to recognise medical qualifications granted by an institution in a country outside Pakistan for such period and upon such conditions as may be specified in the directions, notwithstanding the fact that such qualifications are not included in the Second Schedule or reciprocal scheme of recognition of such qualifications does not exist. Section 15 of the said Ordinance further authorises the Council to certify certain persons to be possessed of sufficient medical qualifications for such period or upon such conditions as may be specified by the Council in this behalf. Although such conditions have not been specified in section 15 but nothing can be spelt out from the said section to indicate that the power of the Medical Council to specify conditions in this behalf has been subjected to any restrictions.
Therefore, the Council appears to be fully empowered under this section to impose any reasonable conditions as it deems fit. The object behind imposition of such conditions upon the appellants merely appears to be the verification of the genuineness of the M.D. Degree obtained by them. This can clearly be spelt out from the letter of the Pakistan Embassy in Kabul dated 19-4-1984 addressed to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Pakistan requesting it to constitute a "Board" to verify that no unqualified person is registered as a medical practitioner in Pakistan. Admittedly none of the appellants had sought permission to seek admission in Kabul University for attending medical classes and to obtain certificates issued to them. Under such circumstances the conditions imposed by the respondent upon the appellants were neither unreasonable nor unjustified. It is also an admitted position that the appellants had only been issued provisional certificates by the respondent whereby they had been permitted to do only "supervisory practice". The appellants had been informed that registration certificates would be issued to them in due course after completion of necessary formalities. The certificates issued to the appellants were valid only for a year and they were temporary in nature. Consequently issuance of such certificates could not create any vested right in favour of the appellants and the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants in this regard appears to be completely misconceived. We are also of the view that the treatment meted out to the appellants was not discriminatory at all because even if such conditions as are now imposed upon the appellants were not imposed earlier in 1987, the respondent was nevertheless within its right to impose such conditions subsequently if the circumstances of the case so required. Therefore, in view of such circumstances the order passed by the High Court dismissing the writ petition of the appellants does not appear to be open to exception. . .
8. In the result, the appeals are dismissed.