' MUSHIR ALAM, J.--- The petitioner, through this petition has prayed for the following reliefs:- "(a) To declare that the refusal of respondent No,1 to allow admission to the petitioner on migration from Dawood College of Engineering and Technology to Mehran University of Engineering Technology, Jamshoro, is without lawful authority and is of no legal effect.
(b) Direct the said respondent to allow admission to the petitioner in Mehran University of Engineering and Technology, in compliance with the migration orders of the Chief Minister, Sindh.
(c) To make such other declaration and issue such other direction as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.
(d) To grant costs of this petition."
2. Facts on the basis of which reliefs mentioned above were sought, are that the petitioner, who is resident of District Khairpur passed his H.S.C. (Pre-engineering) from Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Sukkur in the year, 1995.
3. It is averred, by the petitioner that he was eligible candidate for admission to Dawood College of Engineering and Technology, Karachi. He, however, was admitted on Minister quota for the academic year 1995-96. The petitioner later also filed an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C., and prayed inter alia to allow him to attend the classes in Mehran University, at his risk and consequences. The petitioner was allowed by the Court on 17-2-1998 to attend the classes at his own risk and under Court orders he was allowed again at his risk to appear in First and Third term of examination.
4. The petitioner who was admitted to first year Pre-Engineering, Industrial, in September, 1996, chose to make request on the ground of poverty for transfer from Dawood College to Mehran University to the Governor of Sindh, on which request, the then Chief Minister ordered "please transfer him" on 28-1-1997. Case of the petitioner is that, the respondent No,1 refused the transfer.
According to the petitioner- such refusal is without lawful authority. In the back-drop of the above facts the petitioner prayed for. The relief reproduced in the earlier part of this judgment.
5. The respondent No,1, Mehran University on pre-admission notice filed their parawise comments, wherein it was averred that migration cannot be granted in view of the migration policy laid down in Rule 11 in the Prospectus of the Mehran University and the University conditions as laid down in the Rule 11, do not permit such transfer.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length, perused the record and Prospectus of Mehran University of Engineering and Technology Jamshoro, Sindh.
7. Mr. Abdul Fattah Malak, learned counsel for the petitioner argued with all vehemence at his command that the Mehran University, was obliged under law to obey the command of Chief Minister, directing transfer of the petitioner from Dawood Engineering College to Mehran University but was unable to point out any law under which the Mehran University was obliged to act on the direction of Chief Minister.
8. On the other hand Mr. Niamatullah Soomro, learned counsel for the Mehran University, strenuously argued that the petition is not maintainable, no vested right of the petitioner has been infringed, furthermore, Chief Minister, does not figure out in the prospectus of the University to issue any direction or order of the nature passed in this case and further that the respondent No,1 was not obliged to follow the same, as the case of the petitioner could only be considered if it fell within the framework of migration policy framed under the Mehran University of Engineering and Technology Act, 1977 besides as per Regulation No,11 contained in Part V Of the Prospectus for the year 1995-96 the request for migration cannot be entertained despite same having been recommended by the Chief Minister. In support of his contentions he cited (1) Gul Khan v.
Government of Balochistan PLD 1989 Quetta 8, (2) Naeem Mirza v. Government of Sindh and 2 others 1987 CLC 1487, (3) Inayatullah v. Altaf Hussain and another 1997 CLC 149, (4) Miss Shazia Altaf v. The Secretary, Health Department Government of Punjab Lahore and 3 others 1997 CLC 358, (5)
Miss Aisha Rehman v. Government of Sindh and another 1998 CLC 1625 and (6) Shahid Ali v. Karachi University and 3 others 1998 CLC 1449.
9. In order to appreciate the contention of the learned counsel it will be advantageous to reproduce Regulation No,11 from the Prospectus of Mehran University laying down the Migration Policy; "11. Migration Policy.
(i) The migration to and from any other University/Institution shall not be allowed in First Year and Final Year Engineering, Architecture and City and Regional Planning.
(ii) The migration shall not be allowed to the students admitted on reciprocal basis.
(iii) The migration will be allowed to other students when:
(a) The father/guardian of the student, as mentioned in his admission form, dies and, thus, the means of support of the student are badly affected.
(b) The Vice-Chancellor desires the migration of the student in the interest of the University.
(iv) The University will have no objection to admit a student of any other University seeking migration to this University provided the seats are available in the relevant discipline but such student shall have to pay Rs,1,00,000 to Mehran University of Engineering and Technology Jamshoro, as migration fee.
(v) The University reserves the right to refuse any migration from or to this University without assigning any reasons thereof.
(vi) The migration of the foreign students will be considered by the Syndicate provided their applications are recommended by the nominating agency and the Federal Ministry of Education indicating genuine individual reasons of the students."
10. The request for migration made by the petitioner, though addressed to the Governor, Chancellor of Mehran University, but orders were passed by the then Chief Minister, request reads as under:- "Sir, ' With due respect it is requested that I am studying in Dawood University of Engineering Karachi in 1st year (Industrial). My migration may kindly be allowed to Mehran University as I am poor man and I am unable to afford at Karachi.
' It is, therefore, requested that migration may be allowed. Thanking you, Yours obediently, (Sd.)
Yasir Arfat."
11. Prospectus of any educational institute is a complete code in itself providing for the courses in various disciplines and facilities, offered by it, admission' policy, hostel eligibility criteria disciplinary regulations and other allied matters to regulate its day to day affairs and relationship between the student and the institute such prospectus are issued after due consultation by the institute in consonance with admission policy issued by the Government. It is to be noted that Secretary to the Government of Sindh, Education Department, by virtue of his office is also member of the Syndicate of Mehran University and the prospectus of the Mehran University is issued after due deliberation by all concerned.
12. Mehran University Engineering Technology has been established under the Act IV of 1977 and the Prospectus of the same has been issued under the authority conferred under the Act IV of 1977 providing for all matters incidental and ancillary to govern relationship between student and the University inter se referred to in the preceding para., unless, it is shown that, the rules and regulations contained in the Prospectus are in conflict with the provisions of Act IV of 1977 or in derogation of any Constitutional provision or any other law for the time being in-force. Prospectus having , been issued in exercise of delegated authority has binding force, and is to be respected and enforced.
13. The Regulation 11, in relation to Migration Policy, has not been shown to be in violation of the Act IV of 1977 or that matter any Constitutional provision nor it violates any of the fundamental rights of the petitioner. Neither the petitioner has challenged the Regulation No,11 dealing with the migration nor, the authority of Mehran University to issue such Prospectus. His only grievance is that since his request for migration has been blessed with the orders of the Chief Minister, therefore, same merits consideration and the University authorities are bound to obey. The command of the Chief Executive of the Province. The arguments are wholly misplaced.
14. The migration regulations referred to above lay down elaborate procedure for migration, any student desiring to seek migration must fulfil the requirement laid down therein. Petitioner meets none of the conditions. One should not unmindful of the fact that under Chapter 2, Principles of Policy, Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 the State is responsible not only to promote social justice and to eradicate social evil, but also to decentralise the Government administration so as to facilitate expeditious disposal of its business to meet the convenience and requirement of public. Such being cardinal rule of good governance is to be invoked in the institutions established under the Act of Parliament. Such institutions should be allowed to work independently within its legal framework. Outside interference would be in negation of Principle of Police and against the rule of good governance, contained in Chapter 2 of the Constitution.
15. Under the migration regulations the Chief Minister does not figure out, at the best, it is the Vice- Chancellor at whose desire the migration can be allowed (Regulation 11 (iii) (b)), but such desire is not unbridled or subjective, but can only be used in the interest of the University.
16. No authority, howsoever, high may it be, can be allowed to superimpose its dictates that may amount to by-pass the rules and regulations framed under the delegated authority. In the instant case in the wake of legal position that has emerged the Chief Minister had no authority to issue direction for the migration of petitioner.
17. In the case of Miss Aisha Khan (Supra) a Division Bench of this Court confronted with some what similar situation noted with grave concern the undue interference by the Government, in the affairs of Dow Medical College within same city, although under the prospectus for Medical Colleges Sindh 1996-97 in relation to migration certain rules were laid down and under the Prospectus, the Government reserved to itself the rights to "relax the above conditions in some special causes". In the reported case Secretary of Health Government of Sindh had ordered migration in relaxation of rules as "Special case." The Honourable Division Bench struck down such directive and issued show-cause notice to the Secretary of Health to show cause for the "Special Case", on the basis of which such transfer was ordered.
18. In the instant case there is nothing to even suggest that any reservation of authority to relax any condition of migration is available either with the Government or for that matter with the Governor who happens to be the Chancellor of the Mehran University. On the contrary the University had, reserved to itself the right to refuse migration, without assigning any reasons (Regulation 11 (vi)).
19. There is consensus of opinion as reflected in the reported judgment of Superior Courts, referred in para. No,8 (supra), that no one has vested right in the admission to any professional college nonetheless right to transfer or migration from one institute to another.
20. Consequently the petition being devoid of any merit same alongwith all the listed applications is dismissed with costs.