CLC 1990

1990 PLP 843 (CLC)

ABDUL GHAFFAR PATHAN ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Constitutional Petition No.769 of 1988, decided on 31st January, 1989.
Honorable Judges
Saleem Akhtar and Imam Ali Kazi, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1990 PLP 843 (CLC)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Saleem Akhtar and Imam Ali Kazi, JJ
Parties ABDUL GHAFFAR PATHAN ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH
Primary Law Educational Institution‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 843 (CLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: Educational Institution‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 843 (CLC)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Saleem Akhtar and Imam Ali Kazi, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 843 (CLC) (ABDUL GHAFFAR PATHAN ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Educational Institution‑

Representation

  • Muhammad Ashraf Qureshi for Petitioner.
  • A.A. 11%Iuhammadally A.A: G. for Respondents.
  • Dates of hearing: 23rd and 31st January, 1989.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑ Prospectus of M.B.B.S. and B.D.S. for Medical Colleges in Sindh Province for Academic Year 1987‑88, Rule 17‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973),Art.199‑‑ Admission‑‑‑Petitioner seeking admission in Medical College was not given credit of 20 marks on account of his having completed NCC Training as he had filed a Provisional Certificate and on account of refusal to give marks, on computation his marks became lesser than last candidate admitted in Sindh Institutions‑‑ When petitioner had filed his application for admission, provisional certificate for having completed NCC course attached with application, was considered sufficient compliance of relevant Rule to entitle petitioner to addition of 20 marks‑‑‑Petitioner received final certificate for NCC after relevant date which was filed by him‑‑‑Held, Selection Board had acted without lawful authority when it refused to give credit of twenty marks on account of completion of NCC Course by petitioner merely on ground that a provisional certificate, genuineness of which was never denied at any stage, was filed whereby his merit was lowered, and worked out contrary to provision made in Rules, otherwise on proper working out merit of petitioner in accordance with said rule, he would have been admitted as a matter of right‑‑‑Authorities were directed to admit petitioner in Medical College in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

3. After being unsuccessful with his request addressed to the Principal and Chairman Selection Board Chandka Medical College, Larkana to reconsider his case, he has filed the present petition seeking a direction of this Court to the Principal and Chairman Selection Board to add 20 marks of N.C.C. and admit him on his own merit in the said institution.

4. Mr. Ashraf Qureshi, learned counsel for the petitioner has mainly contended that by rule 17 of the prospectus of MBBS and BDS for medical colleges in Sindh Province for the academic year 1987‑88, the petitioner was entitled to the addition of 20 marks for services rendered in National Cadet Scheme subject to production of a certificate under the National Guards Act, 1973. In compliance with this rule, he had obtained the certificate of the Officer incharge of the said course at Larkana who had also made a reference to the Head Quarters for issuance of a final certificate. According to him, the production of this certificate was in due and substantial compliance of rule 17(b)(i) and petitioner entitled to the credit of 20 marks and the merit of the petitioner was required to be worked out under rule 17 of the Prospectus 1987‑88 which is reproduced as under:‑‑ "

17. Rules for working out merit of candidates.‑‑ (a) Merit for admission shall be determined on the total number of marks secured in Inter Science or B.Sc. examination as the case may be. (b) The following marks shall be added or deducted from the total marks of the candidates in order to prepare the adjusted merit marks for final merit list. This addition or deduction shall not alter the Division/Grade of the candidate. (i) Add 20 marks for service rendered under National Cadet Corps Scheme subject to the production of requisite certificate under the National Guards Act, 1973. (ii) Deduct 5 marks if candidate has appeared a second time, in Inter Science or B.Sc. Examination in order to improve his/her Division/Grade." 20 marks were to be added on account of N.C.C. Course to 705 marks obtained by him at the Intermediate Science Examination and 5 marks were to be A deducted as he had appeared second time in Inter‑Science Examination to improve his grade. His total marks for the purpose of working out his merit will be 720 marks.

5. The petitioner received his final certificate from the Head Quarters on I B 3‑5‑1988 which was filed by him.

6. According to Mr. AA. Mohammadally, learned Additional Advocate General, Sindh the petitioner was not given the credit of 20 marks because the petitioner did not file final certificate of having completed the course under the C National Cadet Corps Scheme and instead had filed a provisional certificate. But he frankly conceded that after addition of 20 marks and deduction of 5 marks as stated above the petitioner was entitled to admission as a matter of right.

7. It is pertinent to note that at the time when the petitioner had filed his application for admission alongwith required documents including N.C.C. D certificate no objection was recorded in respect thereof. The genuineness of this certificate has even been doubted at any later stage. In other words the provisional certificate thus filed was considered to be sufficient compliance of the relevant rule to entitle the petitioner to addition of 20 marks.

8. In circumstances of this case, we find that the respondent Principal and Chairman Selection Board Chandka Medical College, Larkana acted without lawful authority as he refused to give a credit of 20 marks on account of completion of NCC Course by the Petitioner merely on the ground that a 1E provisional certificate (though its genuineness was never doubted at any stage) was filed whereby his merit was lowered and worked out contrary to the provisions made in the rules. On proper working out the merit of the petitioner in accordance with the said rules he would be entitled to be admitted as a matter of right.

9. In view of above by a short order dated 31‑1‑1989 we had allowed the F petition and directed the respondents Nos.1 and 2 to admit the petitioner in Chandka Medical College, Larkana in first year M.B.B.S. Class. Above are the reasons for our said order. M.Y.H./A‑662/K Petition allowed