SCMR 2004

2004 PLP 824 (SCMR)

AHMED AZEEM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Karachi and another‑‑‑ Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Petition No.57‑K of 2002, decided on 28th February, 2002.
Honorable Judges
Nazim Hussain Siddiqui and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2004 PLP 824 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Nazim Hussain Siddiqui and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ
Parties AHMED AZEEM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Karachi and another‑‑‑ Respondents
Primary Law Prospectus of the Medical Colleges in Sindh (1991‑92)‑‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 824 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Prospectus of the Medical Colleges in Sindh (1991‑92)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 824 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Nazim Hussain Siddiqui and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 824 (SCMR) (AHMED AZEEM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Karachi and another‑‑‑ Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Prospectus of the Medical Colleges in Sindh (1991‑92)‑‑‑

Representation

  • Muzaffarul Haque, Advocate Supreme Court and Faizanul Haq, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
  • Nemo. for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 28th February, 2002.
  • 3. We have heard Mr. Muzaffarul Haq, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of the petitioner in detail and have gone through impugned order as well as record and proceedings of the case in minute particulars.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the order dated 27‑9‑2001 of the High Court of Sindh at Karachi passed in C.P. No.D‑615 of 2001). ‑‑‑‑Rule, 8‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts.185(3) & 199‑‑ Admission in medical college‑‑‑Medical college in which the petitioner was admitted was closed down by the Government‑‑‑Students of the defunct medical college were given admissions in other medical colleges in their city of residence on self‑finance basis‑‑‑Similar offer was made to the petitioner but he could not avail the same due to lack of finances‑‑ Grievance of the petitioner was that the authorities had given him admission in a medical college away from his home town ‑‑‑Validity‑‑ Right of admission was a discretionary right of the Government and it could not be claimed as a vested right‑‑‑Prospectus of Medical Colleges in Sindh (1991‑92) pertained to entire medical colleges of the Province wherein rules and policies for submitting applications/forms and seeking admission in various colleges was prescribed‑‑‑Condition of domicile in a particular district claiming admission in a medical college situated in. that district could not confer the right to get admission in that particular district‑‑‑Admission in medical colleges was open on merits as provided by Rules‑‑‑Petitioner failed to point out any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the authorities‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused.

Judgment & Decree

ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.

By this petition, petitioner Ahmed Azim has sought leave to appeal impugning the Order dated 27‑9‑200: passed by learned Division Bench of High Court of Sindh, Karachi in Constitutional Petition No.D‑615 of 2001 whereby the same was dismissed in limine alongwith listed application.

2. The petitioner and several other students were admitted in M.B.B.S. course in Vohra Medical College, Karachi in the year 1991. They had completed two years (1st Professional) whereafter the Government of Sindh closed the College and the University of Karachi discontinued its affiliation. In accordance with Government policy the students were absorbed in different Medical Colleges except the petitioner whose name missed from the list of' such students. Accordingly, he agitated his grievance before the Provincial Ombudsman and it was on his orders dated 30‑8‑2000 he was offered admission in Chandka Medical College, Larkana. He, however, did not join but claimed that as a matter of right he should be admitted either in Dow or Sindh Medical College at Karachi. He made several representations to the authorities but all in vain.

3. We have heard Mr. Muzaffarul Haq, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of the petitioner in detail and have gone through impugned order as well as record and proceedings of the case in minute particulars.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the petitioner has been discriminated by not giving admission in Dow or Sindh Medical College, Karachi for no fault on his part. According to rule 8 of the Prospectus issued by Government of Sindh, Health Department with regard to the admission in Medical Colleges of Sindh, the petitioner being domiciled in Karachi was entitled to be accommodated in any Medical College at Karachi. He lastly contended that since the admission was allowed on `Self‑Finance Basis' and he had to deposit Rs. One lac per year which he could not offer due to sudden death of his father, as such his matter would have been considered on compassionate grounds.

5. Admittedly 250 students of the defunct Vohra Medical College of Province of Sindh on `Self‑Financing Scheme', the petitioner was also offered such an opportunity but he did not avail the same. The right of admission is purely a discretionary right of the Government and it cannot be claimed as a vested right by the petitioner or anybody else. The Prospectus of the year 1991‑92 referred above pertains to the entire Medical Colleges of Province of Sindh, wherein the Rules and the Polices for submitting applications/forms and seeking admission in various Colleges are prescribed, as such, the condition of domicile in a particular District claiming admission in a Medical College situated in that District cannot confer the right to get admission in that particular District. Rule 8 of the Prospectus deals with the submission of applications/forms and required documents to the Principals of the Medical Colleges' where the candidates are domiciled only. So far the admission in the different Medical Colleges of Sindh is concerned, it is open on merits as provided by the Rules. The learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order which is accordingly maintained. In the result, the petition is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. M.H./A‑26/S Petition dismissed.