CHAUDHARY MUHAMMAD TAJ, J.---This appeal, by leave, is directed against the judgment passed by the High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir on 18-11-2002. Whereby the writ petition was dismissed.
2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the appellant applied to the Nomination Board of Azad Jammu and Kashmir for nomination in M.B.B.S. Course for the Session 2001-2002 against the quota reserved for Muzaffarabad District. The appellant did not come on the merit as such was not nominated. However, subsequently ten additional seats for M.B.B.S. Course were provided for Azad Jammu and Kashmir nationals out of which two were allocated to Muzaffarabad District. The Nomination Board nominated respondent No.9 who was already studying in Sindh Medical College, Karachi, against a seat reserved for the children of Army Personnel. The appellant applied to the Nomination Board for withdrawal of the nomination of respondent No.9 on the ground that the aforesaid respondent stood admitted in Sindh Medical College, Karachi, and the Admission Rules for Medical. Colleges in the Punjab do not permit the said candidate who already stood admitted in the same course to get admission in any Medical College of the country. It was disclosed that respondent No.9 was nominated for Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore, in the Province of the Punjab, Pakistan. The Nomination Board did not redress the grievance of the appellant as such a writ petition was filed on the aforesaid ground in the High Court which was dismissed. Hence this appeal.
3. Abdul Rashid Abbasi, the learned counsel for the appellant, raised the following points in support of the appeal:-- (i)That the learned Single Judge in the High Court has not interpreted, appreciated and applied the nomination rules of Azad Jammu and Kashmir as well as Admission Rules of the Government Medical Colleges in the Punjab. It was contended that the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Nomination Rules known as "The Instructions" contain a rule that the procedure of selection and determination of eligibility of the students of Azad Jammu and Kashmir will be the same as in force in the concerned educational institution, therefore, the rules governing the admission provided in the prospectus applied to the Nomination Board.
(ii)That according to the Prospectus of Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore, in the Province of Punjab, it was provided that a candidate who was admitted in any of the Medical Colleges of the country cannot apply for fresh admission therefore, nomination of respondent No.9 was against the Admission Policy of Medical College; and (i.e)That respondent No.9 suppressed the fact of her admissions in the Sindh Medical College, Karachi and secured her nomination against the rules and after securing nomination got cancelled admission in the Sindh Medical College, Karachi.
4. M. Tabassum Aftab Alvi, who appeared on behalf of respondent No.9, while controverting the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant, maintained that admission of respondent No.9 in the Sindh Medical College, Karachi against the Army Personnel quota was a conditional "admission which was later on cancelled when she was nominated by the Nomination Board of Azad Jammu and Kashmir against the additional seats allocated to Muzaffarabad District It was vehemently argued that the claim of the appellant that the respondent's admission in Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore, was against the Admission Policy of the said College, was without any substance for the simple reason that the Nomination Board of Azad Jammu and Kashmir framed rules known as "The Instructions" governing the nomination of the candidates according to which respondent No.9, in view of her merit, was nominated against the additional seat. The Admission Policy of Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore was not applicable to the candidates nominated by the Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Nomination Board but for the candidates domiciled in Punjab. Even otherwise respondent No.9's admission in the Sindh Medical College, Karachi, had been cancelled.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the record carefully.
The dispute relates to the nomination made for the year 2001-2002 against the quota reserved for Muzaffarabad District. According to the merit list prepared by the Nomination Board, where appellant and respondent No.9 applied for their nominations for the admission in Medical Colleges of Pakistan for M.B.B.S. Course, respondent No.9 was placed at Sr.No.14 while the appellant was placed at Sr. No.15'of the merit list. Both the contestants were not nominated. However, on allocation of additional seats out of which two were allocated to Muzaffarabad District, respondent No.9 was nominated against the one for admission in Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore, in the Province of Punjab, Pakistan. Before this nomination respondent No.9 was admitted in the Sindh Medical College, Karachi, against Army Personnel quota.
6. The appellant has challenged the nomination on the main ground that according to the Prospectus of Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore, the Admission Policy did not allow any candidate to get admission who was already admitted in any Medical College of Pakistan. It was emphasized that the Admission Policy framed by the Nomination Board known as "The Instructions" was made keeping in view the Admission Policy of the relevant Medical College therefore, it was argued that respondent No.9 could not be nominated for the said College. The learned counsel for the appellant referred to Instruction 9 of "The Instructions" alongwith rule 17 of the Prospectus of Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore for the relevant year. The High Court in its judgment did not, accept the contention of the learned counsel , for the appellant holding therein that rule 17 of the Prospectus of Fatima Jinnah Medical. College, Lahore has no nexus with the nomination of Azad Jammu and Kashmir candidate. The relevant observation appearing at page 10 of the judgment is reproduced:-- "The contention of the learned Advocate that eligibility for nomination of respondent No.9 would be determined in light of the Instruction No. 17 of the Prospectus in my opinion, is misconceived. Rule 17 has no nexus with the nomination of the, candidates for AJ&K Nationals. Prospectus itself placed an embargo in the chapter of eligibility that the applicants from AJ&K and Northern Areas for admission to the M.B.,B.S./B.D.S. Should take the entry test of the Punjab. Therefore, it was incumbent upon the Nomination Board to nominate a candidate who has qualified the entry test and is otherwise on merit. Merit position of respondent No.9 has not been disputed even, by the petitioner.
Therefore, rule 17 in my opinion is not applicable to the AJ&K Nationals. I am supported by a Division Bench judgment of the Lahore High Court reported as 2002 YLR 3479. . . "
6-A. After giving a deep thought, we are of the view that there is no merit in the appeal for the following reasons:--- That the Admission. Policy of the Nomination Board of Azad Jammu and Kashmir known as "The Instructions" A alongwith a condition of passing the entry tests held in the Provinces of the Punjab and N.-W.F.P. Since their introduction and nomination on the basis of merit determined on, the basis of best out of the two entry tests was framed keeping in view the overall circumstances. It would be relevant to mention that all the conditions framed by the Medical Colleges could not be made applicable for framing the admission policy by the Nomination Board of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Suffice to mention that Medical Colleges in different Provinces of the Pakistan had their own Admission Policies. Similarly, the condition referred to by the learned counsel visualized as rule 17 of the Prospectus of Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore was not applicable to the candidates applying for nomination which was also-found in the said prospectus that the same was not applicable for the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Nationals nominated by the Nomination Board. The aforesaid policy was framed for the candidates domiciled in Punjab to avoid' the loss of seat therefore, we have no reason to differ with the findings recorded by the High Court in this regard.
The respondent had a higher merit as compared to the appellant and therefore. Was correctly nominated against the additional seat allocated to Muzaffarabad District by the Nomination Board.
It may also be mentioned that sufficient material has been placed on record by the relevant respondent that the admission against e the quota reserved for Army Personnel in Sindh Medical College, Karachi was a conditional nomination which was subsequently cancelled on the nomination of the respondent by the Nomination Board of Azad Jammu and Kashmir in Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore. The said respondent in view of her merit had a lawful right to be nominated against the seat reserved for Muzaffarabad District. The admission against the Army quota m Sindh Medical College, Karachi, could not be held a bar for nomination by the Nomination Board even if the same was in existence.
7. In view of the above discussion, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.