1999 PLP 2062 (CLC)

(c) Educational institution‑‑ ‑‑‑Candidate was not allowed by Authorities to appear in 3rd Professional Examination of M.B.,B.S. on technical grounds‑‑‑Candidate having completed his previous examinations very successfully, it would be highly unjust to reverse the clock and throw him out on a mere technicality. Mubeen‑ud‑Din Qazi for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Bashir, Asstt. A.‑G., Punjab for Respondents. Date of hearing: 2nd July, 1998. The petitioner passed the Pre‑Medical Higher Secondary School Examination Annual, 1994 from Pakistan Embassy School Riyadh and obtained 837/1100 marks. He also did N.C.C. Course which entitled him to another 20 marks. In response to the advertisement dated 7‑12‑1994 for admission in Medical Colleges for the Sessions 1994‑95, the petitioner applied on 11‑12‑1994. Under, the advertisement the last date for application was 20‑12‑1994 for local students and 27‑12‑1994 for students living abroad. After initial scrutiny, the office of respondent No. l objected to the separate enclosure of the certificate of Principal /Headmaster of the last college/school and insisted that the certificate should be written in the form of admission. The petitioner, therefore, immediately contacted the Principal at Riyadh who obtained fresh application form, did the needful and despatched it through diplomatic bag. It is asserted that unusually the diplomatic bag got delayed and reached Islamabad on 20‑12‑1994. The petitioner obtained the form and resubmitted it on 22‑12‑1994. Respondent No.l rejected form on the ground that it was submitted two days beyond time. This refusal has been challenged through this Constitutional petition. On 1‑2‑1995 this Curt heard the Advocate‑General, Punjab and allowed C.M. No.3 of 1995 directing the respondents to provisionally permit the petitioner to attend the classes. Resultantly, the petitioner is not only attending the classes but as stated at the bar has been passing the examinations also.

3. In the report and parawise comments the only ground for denying the claim of the petitioner for admission is the date submission of the form. Otherwise the merit of the petitioner to be admitted in the college is not denied.

4. Since the main petition was not being listed for hearing, the petitioner moved applications C. M. No. l and C. M. No. 2 of 1998 for an order refraining respondent No. l from withholding the admission form of the petitioner for the 3rd Professional M.13‑B.S. Examination scheduled to commence from 14‑10‑1998. This Court directed fixation of the main case which has been heard for final disposal today.

5. Clearly it is a case of much ado about nothing. It is not denied that initially the application was presented within time on 11‑12‑1994. The office of respondent No. l insisted on removal of some defect which was also of a cursory a nature and did not affect the merit of the petitioner. The petitioner acted with full despatch in removing the objection and for this purpose employed the fastest means for collecting documents from Riyadh i.e. the diplomatic bag. If in these circumstances a delay of two days has occurred, the respondent No. l could not have denied admission. The last date for receipt of applications is fixed for the purpose of regulation and at best is directory. If for reasons beyond control the application is submitted with a little delay, it should not be taken to have destroyed the merit of the petitioner or his right to have himself admitted. Further it should have been appreciated that the petitioner could validly claim that in his ease the last date should be 27‑12‑1994 as he was a student who passed the examination from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. In any case the petitioner having successfully completed his study so far it would be highly unjust to reverse the clock and throw him out on a mere technicality which I hold to be condonable in the facts and circumstances of this case.

6. For the above reasons, this petition is allowed and the refusal of respondent No.l to admit the petitioner is hereby declared as without lawful authority and consequently of no legal effect. The petitioner will be deemed to have been validly admitted. No order as to costs. Q.M.H./M.A.K./A‑325/L Petition allowed.