1. ' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---This appeal with leave of the Court is directed against the judgment dated 234-1996 passed by a learned Division Bench of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, whereby appellant's Writ Petition No,79 of 1995 for seeking admission to the 1st Year. B.Sc.
2. Engineering in the N.-W.F.P. University of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar (hereinafter referred to as the University), against the reserved seat for Gadoon, was dismissed.
3. ' The facts precisely narrated for the disposal of this appeal are that the appellant passed his F.Sc.
4. (Pre-Engineering) Examination from the Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Islamabad (hereinafter referred to as the Board), by securing 747 marks out of the total 1100 marks.
5. According to Category 19 of Chapter 6 of the prospectus of the University, one seat was reserved for Gadoon for the session 1994-95, where it is provided as under:-- "19. Gadoon Area.
6. ' Nomination of the candidate shall be made by the Secretary to Government of N.-W.F.P., Home and Tribal Affairs Department, Peshawar."
7. ' As per aforestated provision of prospectus, admission to the 1st Year B.Sc. Engineering in the University against the reserved seat was to be granted on the nomination sent by the Secretary to the Government of N.-W.F.P., Home and Tribal Affairs Department, Peshawar (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary), to the University. The appellant, being a bona fide resident of village Qadra Gadoon, applied to the Deputy Commissioner, Swabi, on 24-11-1994 as the applications for the said reserved seat were to be routed through Deputy Commissioner, Swabi, and the Commissioner, Mardan Division, for onward transmission to the Secretary. The appellant's application was despatched by the Deputy Commissioner, Swabi, to the Commissioner, Mardan Division, on 29-11- 1994, who in turn forwarded the same to the Secretary.
8. ' On the other hand, respondent No,6 who was having 703 marks, applied earlier than the appellant and his application reached the Secretary after processing on 14-11-1994. As reflected from the impugned judgment, the Dean of Faculty of Engineering of the University (i.e, respondent No,2) through his letter dated 28-9-1994 asked the Secretary to send nomination against the aforesaid reserved seat for Gadoon area on or before 15-11-1994. Since the appellant's application was received after the above date, as such the Secretary only forwarded the application of respondent No,6 through his Letter No,5/1 Engg- S.O.T.A. 11/HD/94 dated 18-12-1994 to respondent No,2.
9. ' The appellant, feeling aggrieved by the said action of respondent No,2, approached the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, by filing Writ Petition No,79 of 1995 which has been dismissed through the impugned judgment.
10. ' This Court on 26-5-1996 granted leave to appeal and also allowed the appellant to continue his provisional admission which was earlier granted to him under the orders of the High Court as an interim measure.
11. We have considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record with their assistance. It is reflected from the perusal thereof that the University issued an advertisement on 19-11-1994 in the daily "Muslim", Islamabad inviting applications for admission to the 1st Year B.Sc. Engineering for the Academic Session 1994- 95 and the last date for receipt thereof was 5-12-1994. However, in the said admission notice/publication respecting the reserved seats, the following was published:-- ' "Applications for admission against the reserved quota should, however, be submitted through the relevant quarters for nominations as per instruction given in the prospectus."
12. The appellant applied for the same. However, his application was simply rejected as, according to the intimation given by the University to the Secretary, nomination for the reserved seat has to be made by the Secretary on or before 15-11-1994. The appellant had no knowledge of the same as borne out from the record. It is admitted that the appellant has completed his studies and his result of the Final Year of B.Sc. Engineering has been withheld/detained by the University on account of pendency of the appeal filed by the appellant in this Court.
13. We fail to understand how the appellant could have knowledge of the last date i.e, 15-11-1994 for receipt of applications for nomination on reserved seats through the Secretary when notice/publication for the same appeared in the newspapers on 19-11-1994. Further, as already quoted in the advertisement qua reserved seats, it was mentioned that instructions for the same were given in the prospectus. If the last date was 15-11-1994 then what was the fun of making publication on 19-11-1994 after the last date in the Press and inviting applications from the prospective candidates for sending nominations on the reserved seats to the Secretary. We have also noticed from the prospectus in sub-clause (8) of clause (5.2) of Chapter 5 that the last date for sending nominations on reserved seats would be communicated to the concerned nominating authorities by the University. This clause reads as under:-- "8. The nominations under reserved seats categories 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 shall be invited separately through the nominating agencies. The last date for the receipt of nominations will be communicated to concerned nominating authorities."
14. ' In pursuance to the above clause, the Dean of University intimated the Secretary the last date for receipt of nominations as 15-11-1994. It is admitted that it was an internal correspondence between the Dean of University and the Secretary. The appellant could not have known about the same unless and until it is so made public. It is worth mentioning that the last date, according to the advertisement, for receipt of application was 5-12-1994. All these aspects totally escaped the notice of the learned Judges of the High Court. The impugned judgment is based on surmises and conjectures wherein the learned Judges held as under:- ' "Moreover, it is inconceivable that a student, after passing the qualifying examination, would not approach the University to enquire about the schedule of admission. It is a matter of common knowledge and routine in the earthly order of events that every student approaches the concerned educational institutions for admission on the earliest after he passes the qualifying examination. In the present case the petitioner must have visited the University of Engineering after passing his F.Sc. Examination. If he has not done so then he is not entitled to any concession because the law does not appreciate those who sleep over this rights and, in the instant case, this principle shall be complied with more strictly because the petitioner was bound in duty to approach the concerned educational institution in order to acquire knowledge about the time frame of admission in that he was claiming a privilege by way of admission against a special seat in preference to all other citizens. We have also perused the prospectus pertaining to the relevant year which is self- contained with all details furnished therein and no one can advocate paucity of knowledge about the schedule as well as the mode of admission after obtaining the prospects."
15. At the costs of repetition it may be stated, how a student would approach the University when admission has not yet started and the University has not made it public? The publication was made on 19-11-1994 and the prospective candidates for the reserved seats were directed therein to get prospectus. All the aforesaid resume demonstrate that the appellant could not have any knowledge of the last date for the reserved seat which was internally fixed between the Dean of University and the Secretary. In case the last date was 15-11-1994 as stated by the respondents, then we fail to understand as to why mention of the same was made qua the reserved seat in the publication of 19-11-1994 we have further noticed that the appellant has completed his studies and his final result has simply been withheld/detained by the University authorities on account of pendency of his appeal in this Court.
16. ' Resultantly, for the foregoing reasons, we allow this appeal, set aside the judgment impugned of the High Court and direct the University Authorities to declare the result of the appellant forthwith.