2002 PLP 1182 (MLD)

SABIHUDDIN AHMED, J.‑‑‑Admittedly the petitioner was admitted into Chandka Medical College, Larkana on the basis of her result in Intermediate Science Examination taken in 1993. However, upon verification of her documents it was found that the interpolation had been affected on her Intermediate Certificate to the extent that not improved was erased to read improved . In this context it may be pertinent to mention that the petitioner had appeared at the Intermediate Examination in the previous year i.e. 1992 obtaining 774 Marks, but could not qualify for admission into a medical college. She subsequently attempted to improve her result by appearing once again in 1993 but could not succeed as she obtained lesser marks i.e.

759. Mr. Sarwar Khan, learned Additional Advocate‑General has explained that under rule 2(vi) of the Rules of Admission of Medical Colleges in Sindh (which have the effect of statutory rules under Sindh Medical Colleges Act), candidates who attempt to repeat their Intermediate Science Examination for improvement but do not actually improve are not eligible to apply for admission. As such the petitioner was not eligible to apply but through the aforesaid interpolation managed to secure admission. He further argued that Rules 22 and 23 require that all admissions are provisional and subject to verification of document submitted and a candidate who furnishes or relies upon a false or forged document is to be debarred from getting admission in a medical institution and also subjected to prosecution. In the instant case the petitioner's admission was cancelled after due notice to her which is perfectly legal. Mr. Gul Bahar Korai, learned counsel for the petitioner was not able to seriously dispute the factual position. However, he argued that the petitioner had reached fourth year of her study in the medical college and cancellation of her admission at this stage would be inequitable. He has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Punjab Engineering College v. Dharminder Kumar Singhal (1990 AIEC 75) and our own Supreme Court in Chairman, Joint Admission Committee, Khyber Medical College v. Raja Hussain (1991 SCMR 965). The above judgment of the Indian Supreme Court does not directly support the petitioner and all that was observed was "that while the Court did not examine the correctness of the finding of the High Court in regard to the alleged illegality of admission, the conduct of officers granting such admission should be above suspicion. At the same time their Lordships clearly observed that these where infringed the rule must pay for their lapse. The judgment of our own Supreme Court relied upon by Mr. Korai only reiterates the well‑settled principle that orders creating vested rights cannot be recalled. However, we failed to see what vested e right the petitioner can claim to have been created on the basis of admitted forged documents. In the circumstances this petition has to be dismissed and we do so accordingly, in limine. H.B.T./R‑65/K Petition dismissed.