MUHAMMAD BASHIR KHAN JEHANGIRI, J.---This petition for special leave to appeal seeks to call in question the dismissal of the petitioners' Constitutional Petition No.250/1994 by a learned Division Bench of the Baluchistan High Court by its order dated 22-6-1995.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that petitioner No.1 was originally resident of District Bahawalnagar in the Province of Punjab. In the year 1963 petitioner No.1 joined service in the Education Department of erstwhile Province of West Pakistan at Loralai in Baluchistan. During the course of his service, he also married his wife who is resident of Loralai. In the year 1971, petitioner No.1 was granted Domicile Certificate of Loralai District. The elder son of petitioner No.1, namely, Muhammad Kamran, applied for admission to Engineering College against the reserved seat of Loralai for year 1989-90. Notwithstanding objections raised against his candidature for the special seat of Loralai District and on a reference by the Selection Committee, the Deputy Commissioner, Loralai, verified the claim of Muhammad Kamran and he was admitted in Engineering College in Quetta and had since completed his studies. Petitioner No.2, who is the son of petitioner No.1 and brother of Muhammad Kamran for aforesaid, after passing his F.Sc. (Pre-Medical) applied for admission to Bolan Medical College for the Session 1993-94 with 650 marks again on the Domicile Certificate of Loralai District. Respondent No.2 with 628 marks was also a candidate for the aforesaid special seat of Loralai District. The Domicile Certificate of petitioner No.2,, on reference, was verified by the Deputy Commissioner, Loralai on 12-6-1994. Respondent No-2 made an application to the Deputy Commissioner, Loralai, for cancellation of Domicile Certificate of petitioner No. 1. Upon contest, the Deputy Commissioner held on 13-9-1994 that "petitioner No.1 had no permanent interest or lien in Loralai which is a basic requirement for acquiring Domicile Certificate for the purpose of proving permanent residence at a specific place" and, in consequence, declared petitioner No.1 to be non-resident of Loralai. Respondent No.2 was, therefore, granted admission in the Bolan Medical College while petitioner No.2 was declined the aforesaid seat.
3. Dissatisfied by this order passed by the District Magistrate, Loralai and that of the Selectic)n Committee of the Bolan Medical College, the petitioners filed the Constitutional petition against it under Article 199 of the Constitution. On 22-6-1995, a learned Division Bench of the High Court of Baluchistan dismissed their petition. The Court was of the opinion that the Selection Committee was empowered to recall its recommendation before issuing the final approval./notification by the Government of Baluchistan accepting or rejecting the candidature of a candidate seeking admission in Professional Colleges, for, till then no decisive steps had been taken. It further held the view that "even otherwise admission in Professional Colleges does not create vested right". While making reference to the to pronouncements of this Court in: (i) Miss Sumaeea Zareen v. Selection Committee, Bolan Medical College, Quetta and others (1991 SCM R 2099) and (ii) Miss Salina Mughal v. Selection Committee, Bolan Medical College, Quetta and others, (1993 SCM R 2083) the learned Judges in the High Court observed that "except possessing a valid certificate the petitioner is admittedly neither resident nor a native or inhabitant of that place, therefore, his case does not stand the test of legal scrutiny at the touchstone laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court".
4. In these circumstances, the petitioners have filed this petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment of the learned Division Bench of the High Court.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, contended that petitioner No.1 was in possession of the domicile certificate issued in his favour by the District Magistrate, Loralai and that in these circumstances merely because petitioner No.1 had sold his house in Loralai District would not deprive him or his son from the domicile of that District. According to him, petitioner No.1 was residing in Quetta due to exigency of service and not of his free volition or choice.
6. Leave to appeal is granted to consider whether the High Court was correct to decline to strike down the impugned order of cancellation of domicile certificate of Loralai District of petitioner No.2 when petitioner No.1 was still possessed of his domicile certificate for that District and had been posted, to Quetta in exigency of service?
C.M.A. No.85-0/1995 Notice to the Advocate-General. Until the hearing of main appeal, provisional admission in First Year M.B.,B.S. In the Bolan Medical College for the current session is granted to petitioner No.2 at his own risk and costs.