MUHAMMAD QAIM JAN KHAN, J.--- By virtue of the present Constitutional petition, Qaizar Khan petitioner has assailed the judgment of Additional District Judge, D.I. Khan, dated 27-10-1999, as illegal and without lawful authority whereby revision petition of respondents Nos. l to 4 has been accepted and the plaint of the petitioner has been rejected under Order VII. Rule 11, C.P.C. The plaintiff has asked this Court to set aside the aforementioned judgment an remand the case to the trial Court for further proceedings.
2. Facts of the case are that petitioner instituted a declaratory suit at he has obtained admission in LL.B. Part I (evening classes) under Roll No.26 in the Gomai University and has attended his classes for about one month. Thereafter, the defendants/respondents cancelled his admission on the ground that he has already obtained a professional degree. According to the petitioner, office order, dated 27-11-1999 vide which his admission has been cancelled is illegal, without jurisdiction and is liable to cancellation. During the trial, defendants/respondents preferred an application under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. This application was resisted by the present petitioner. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the trial Court vide its order, dated 5-4-1999 rejected the application of the respondents/defendants (Gomal University etc.). Dissatisfied with this order, the respondents) defendants preferred revision in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, D.I.
Khan. After hearing the respective counsel for the parties vide order, dated 27-10-1999 the learned Additional District Judge accepted the revision petition, set aside the impugned order, dated 5-4- 1999 passed by the learned Civil Judge and the plaint of the plaintiff (Qiazar Khan) was ordered to be rejected under Order VII, Rule 11, Cr.P.C. Leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, Qiazar Khan has filed the instant Constitutional petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the provisions of Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C.
Are not attracted in his case and that the petitioner had accrued a vested legal right when he was granted admission on self-finance basis in accordance with terms and conditions of the advertisement-cum-prospectus published by respondent No.3 and that the provisions prohibiting the admission on the basis of obtaining double degree is un-Islamic and violative of the Constitutional provisions and this provision can be relaxed in special circumstances as it has been done in the case of a private Frontier Law College, D.I. Khan which is duly affiliated with the Gomal University.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on the record.
5. Regulation No. 15 is reproduced for convenience sake:-- "The candidates who have pursued and/or completed a full course of study in any programme beyond B.A. B.Sc. Level, (in case of B. Pharmacy/BB.A./B.Com. Beyond! F.A./F.Sc. Level. In this University or in any University of the country, or has been on the rolls of any such programme for six months or more or who have privately passed any postgraduate examination shall not be eligible for admission to any programme. Similarly the holders of professional degrees of any kind will also not be so eligible. However, admission to B.Ed. Will be permitted to the candidates who have passed their M.A./M.Sc. In accordance with the seat reserved for them on merit as determined by the merit formula including their M.A./M.Sc. Marks. Candidates who have passed their B.Ed. Are also eligible to take admission in M.A./M.Sc. On the basis of their B.A./B.Sc. In accordance with 'admission criteria. Candidates who have passed their M.A./M.Sc. Or other post --graduation in professional subjects unless otherwise stated are ineligible to take admission in B.Sc. Programme. The professional subjects include B.Sc. Engineering, M.B.,B.S., M.B.A., M.P.A. B.Pharmacy/M.Pharm., M.Sc.
Journalism,, M.Sc, HPE, LL.B. And SDPE.
6. Now the position is quite clear. The petitioner is the holder of MPA degree which is .a professional.
Degree. The LL.B. Degree is also professional degree. So, under Rule 15. If a person is the holder of one! Professional degree he cannot take admission in another professional course. This regulation is .For professional degrees and LL.B. Degree is also a professional degree. So, in this background of the case, neither any Constitutional right of the petitioner has been hampered nor there is any illegality in the order of the respondent No.5, dated 27-10-1999. The petition in hand is devoid of legal force, hence dismissed.