' HAMID ALI MIRZA, J.---This civil petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 20-6-2001 in Civil Petition No,D-1430 of 2000 (Miss Rizwana Andleeb v. Principal, Chandka Medical College, Larkana and another) passed by learned Division Bench of the Sindh High Court at Karachi whereby the said Constitution petition was dismissed, hence this petition for leave to appeal.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed Constitution petition before the High Court of Sindh at Karachi stating therein that she has applied for admission in first year M.B.,B.S. Class for the Session 1994-95 and she was selected and she paid usual fee and was also enrolled by the University of Sindh and then she appeared in first professional M.B.,B.S. Examination but failed thereafter she appeared in bi-annual examination and passed the same thereafter paid college fee for second professional M.B.,B.S. Class where she has been attending her classes regularly and the examination forms for second professional M.B.,B.S. Examination were to be filled in from 25th February, 1998 but she was refused orally informing her that her admission was canceled w.e.f, 25- 7-1995. The petitioner filed Civil Petition No,D-166 of 1998 wherein she challenged the cancellation of her admission in the college but her retition was dismissed on 30-6-1999. The petitioner approached this Court through Civil Petition No,485-K of 1999 but the same was also dismissed with the observation requiring Secretary, Health Department, Government of Sindh to examine the petitioner, her brother who had appeared before the Court and the representative of Chandka Medical College as well as the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education., Sukkur and submit his report within two months so as to place the same before the Court during next session at Karachi. The petitioner, however, continued to attend her classes and cleared second professional M.B.,B.S. Examination and was in third professional M.B.,B.S. But has not been allowed to fill in examination form. In the circumstances she filed Constitution Petition No,1430 of 2000 stating in para.10 that new facts have taken place therefore, she be allowed to continue her study on humanitarian ground and be allowed to complete her medical study or she be allowed to take admission in private Medical College on her migration. The said petition was dismissed as per impugned judgment.
3. We have heard the petitioner in person so also respondent No,2 and the Additional Advocate- General, Sindh and have also perused the record.
4. The petitioner's admission was cancelled from 25-7-1995 and she challenged the said cancellation before the High Court of Sindh which petition was dismissed and then she challenged the same before this Court in C.P.L.A. No,485-K of 1999 which too was dismissed observing that enquiry be made by the Secretary Health. The petitioner has again started second round of litigation on the ground that on humanitarian ground she be allowed to complete her medical study because she has been able to reach fourth year M.B.,B.S. Class i.e, third professional examination in which examination she was to appear this year. The respondent submitted that petitioner applied for her admission in first year M.B.,B.S. Class in the year 1992-93 but could not take admission because of less marks as the last candidate. On merit was admitted who has secured 873 marks whereas the petitioner has secured 774 marks. The petitioner reappeared in the Intermediate Examination in the year 1993-94 for improving her grade but she could not improve and secured 759 marks and again she applied for her admission and she was having at her credit 759+20--5=774 marks but she could not get admission on merit as the admission was closed by 851 marks whereas the petitioner was having less marks. The petitioner again applied for her admission in the year 1994-95 but she suppressed her first clearance of Intermediate Examination in the year 1992 on the basis of marks-sheet of 1993 contending non-availability of P.R.C. In the year 1993. It was also stated that after admission, testimonials were sent to the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Sukkur and the Board intimated that she had not improved and the mark-sheet was found to be tampered with by erasing the word "not" before the word "improve" consequently the respondent. No,1 Principal, Chandka Medical College issued show-cause notice calling her for the said fraudulent act on her part of tampering with record and forging the entries as the petitioner could not satisfy the Principal who ultimately cancelled her admission on 22-7- 1995. However, the petitioner with the connivance of .The staff of the Medical College suppressed the cancellation of her admission and succeeded in getting her self-enrolled with the University and passed her first professional examination. The High Court as per order dated 8-1-1998 appointed Mr. Bashir Ahmed Memon, Official Assignee as Commissioner for investigating the matter afresh who submitted his enquiry report. Reference was also made to rule 9 and rule 2 of the prospectus for Session 1994-95. The respondent finally submitted that the petitioner had forged the document and had committed fraudulent act therefore, in view of rule 22 of prospectus her admission was liable to be cancelled.
5. We, in the circumstances, find no substance and merit in this petition considering that her admission was cancelled way back on 25-7-1995 and she challenged the said cancellation of her admission before the High Court in first round of litigation and also approached this Court but she failed to succeed. There was no fresh ground available to the petitioner seeking declaration of the Court for continuance of her study when the admission stood cancelled long back in the year 1095 but she managed to continue her study in the college till she reached in the 4th year M.B.,B.S Class.
We cannot condone all what has been said above. It was also stated by the respondent's Representative that there were many other such cases where the students have committed forgeries and, by hook or crook they managed to continue their studies therefore, in case if the acts and omissions of the petitioner are condoned then the others would also make the same as precedent which would not be in the interest of the institution and education as a whole. We find merit in submissions of the respondents.
6. In the circumstances we find no merit in this petition therefore, leave to appeal is declined and petition is dismissed. However, she would be at liberty to move the University or any other competent authority for seeking her migration for seeking admission in some other private institution for completion of her medical study if the concerned institution allows the same in terms of their rules and regulations.