1999 PLP 3397 (MLD)

PLD 1975 SC 667; 1978 SCMR 327; PLD 1973 Lah 600 and Ahmed Latif's case PLD 1994 Lah. 3 ref. Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner. Nasrullah Khan, Head of Physics Department and Shabbir Ahmed Mughal, Associate Professor, Government College; Sahiwal. Date of hearing: 13th January, 1998 The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner submitted application for obtaining admission in M.Sc, Physics Part I in Government Degree College, Sahiwal. The respondents accepted the Admission Form and allowed the petitioner to appear in the written examination. The petitioner's counsel contended that the petitioner got through the written Examination but the respondents refused to admit him on the ground that the petitioner passed the B.Sc. Examination with third Division The learned counsel of the petitioner contended that the advertisement did not mention these words. He further contended that the petitioner proved himself to be intelligent student as the petitioner passed the test/Examination as compared to the candidates who obtained 2nd Division in B.Sc. Examination but did not get through the Test/ Examination. He further contended that Government Policy is in violation of the fundamental rights and Article 25 of the Constitution. He further contended that principle of promissory estoppel is attracted and the omission of the respondents to accept the Admission for created vested right of the petitioner and subsequently respondents could not deviate from that permission which the respondents granted to him in the shape of allowing his admission form and to appear in the test admission Examination

2. The respondents submitted report and parawise comments and relied upon the Admission Policy for the admission to classes of Part 1 of M.A/M.Sc. and the relevant paragraph is as follows:-- "A candidate who has secured at least 2nd Division 45 per cent marks in a subject or 2nd division in B.A./B.Sc. Examination will be eligible for admission to M.A. /M.Sc. Classes." The parawise comments further reveal that in the prospectus it is clearly mentioned that the admission be given to the candidates in accordance with the Government Policy and the advertisement exactly contained the following condition:-- The Head of the Physics Department of the said College stated that admission was made strictly in accordance with the Government Policy. He admitted that the petitioner passed the written Test/Examination held by the respondents.

3. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel of the parties. It is settled law that right must be based on law and this Court has jurisdiction to pass order in case the respondents deviate from any law as is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Akhtar Mir's case 1984 SCMR

433. It is prerogative of the Government to formulate policy and this Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution has no jurisdiction to substitute its own decision in place of the decision of the competent authority i.e. Policy Maker (PLD 1975 SC 667), (1978 SCMR 327) and PLD 1973 Lah.

600. It is also a settled principle of law that petitioner cannot be penalised by the omission of the public functionaries as is held by this Court in Ahmad Latifs case PLD 1994 Lahore

3. It is admitted fact that the petitioner submitted admission form which was accepted by the respondents and allowed him to appear in the written test examination and the petitioner passed the written Examination/Test. Subsequently the respondents did not admit the petitioner on the basis of the aforesaid policy. In view of these circumstances let a copy of the writ petition be sent to; Respondent No. 1 who shall consider the case of the petitioner in parental jurisdiction to save the career of the petitioner who has been able to show his merit by passing the written test/Examination. Respondent No.l is further directed that he shall send the case of the petitioner alongwith his recommendation to Secretary Education who shall look into the matter and consider the case of the petitioner in a parental jurisdiction to save the career of the petitioner as the admissions have almost closed in all the Institutions. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of. H.B.T./A-17/L Order accordingly.