2001 PLP 1820 (YLR)
FOUZIA REHMAN KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SELECTION COMMITTEE and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2001 PLP 1820 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Quetta |
| Bench Members | Amanullah Khan Yasinzai and Ahmed Khan Lashari, JJ |
| Parties | FOUZIA REHMAN KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SELECTION COMMITTEE and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Educational institution‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 1820 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Educational institution‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 1820 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Quetta bench comprising: Amanullah Khan Yasinzai and Ahmed Khan Lashari, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 1820 (YLR) (FOUZIA REHMAN KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SELECTION COMMITTEE and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- H. Shakil Ahmed for Petitioner.
- Syed Ayaz Zahoor for Respondents Nos. 1 and 3.
- Chaudhry Mumtaz Yousaf for Respondent No.4.
- Date of hearing: 4th October, 2000.
- Chaudhry Mumtaz Yousaf, learned counsel for respondent No.4, contended, that the father of respondent No.4, was transferred from Bolan Medical College to Musa Khel in' the year, 1981 and he never joined his place of posting at Musa Khel for a continuous period of five years, therefore, he ceased to be a Government employee and since then, he has been practising privately, thus, the respondent No‑4 has been rightly admitted against the seats reserved for Doctors' children, mentioned in Category "C".
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑ Admission in medical college against the seats reserved for Doctors' children‑‑‑Three categories of Doctors were made in the Prospectus for admission‑ purpose: Teaching Staff of College concerned; Doctors serving the Provincial Health Department, and Doctors not employees of Provincial Government, but doing full‑time private medical practice‑‑‑Candidate applied for 'B' Category, but in that category another candidate having more marks was selected‑‑ In Category 'C' another candidate whose father was full‑time private practitioner and was not in Government service, was given admission‑‑‑Candidate after she was declined admission in Category 'B' raised objection against the other candidate who was given admission in Category 'C' contending that her father was in Government service‑‑‑Father of said other candidate who had been in Government service, was transferred to another place of working, but he did not join the service there and remained absent for a continuous period of four to five years from that service and neither received any salary nor joined duty even on service of notice on him and he worked as full‑time private practitioner‑‑‑Since at the time of granting admission to the said other candidate in Category 'C' it was proved that her father was full‑time private medical practitioner and was not in any Government service, ;she was rightly considered for admission in Category ' C'‑‑‑Candidate who could get admission in Category 'B' having not found eligible, would not be entitled for admission under Category 'C'. Ashraf Khan Tanoli A.G.
Judgment & Decree
AMANULLAH KHAN YASINZAI, J.‑‑‑Petitioner Fouzia Rehman daughter of Dr. Abdul Rehman, after having passed her F.Sc. (Pre‑Medical Examination applied for admission in the 1st Year M.B.,B.S. Class of Bolan Medical College, Quetta, for the academic session 1998‑99, under para.10 of the Prospectus of Bolan Medical College for the year, 1998‑99, against the reserved seats of Doctors' children. For reference, para.10 of the Prospectus is reproduced herein below: ‑‑ "
10. The Selection Committee against the three seats reserved for the children of Doctors of Balochistan shall be made from amongst eligible children of doctor who are local‑Domicile of Balochistan or possess valid permanent residence Certificate of Balochistan, and their selection will be effected according to the following three categories:‑‑ CATEGORY A: TEACHING STAFF OF BOLAN MEDICAL COLLEGE. Children of Teachers/Doctors in Bolan Medical College, Quetta, with at least ten years service and the children of retired and deceased teachers of Bolan Medical College; are eligible for the seat provided that the deceased teacher had at least ten years service at his credit‑‑‑One seat. CATEGORY B: Children of Doctors serving the provincial Health Department with at least ten years service other‑than those mentioned in Category ' A' above. The Children of retired acid deceased doctors shall also be eligible for the seat provided that the deceased doctor had at least ten years' service at his credit‑‑‑One seat. CATEGORY C: The children of only those doctors who are full‑time Medical Practitioners in Balochistan and arc local/domicile and permanent, resident of Balochistan and are not employees in Provincial Government' and the children of deceased doctors falling in this category would also be eligible for the seat, provided that the‑ deceased is permanently residing in Balochistan, and they should have served the people of Balochistan as Private Practitioner for at least ten years‑‑ One seat. " As her father has retired from Provincial Health services, therefore she applied for admission under Category "B". In this Category, Miss Samina Nasrullah daughter of Dr. Nasrullah having more marks than petitioner was selected. In Category "C" respondent No.4 was given seat, as her father is a Full‑Time Medical Practitioner and is not in her Government service. After she was declined admission in her Category i.e. Category "B" she raised objection against the candidature of respondent No.4, on the ground, that her father was in Government service, therefore, she has been wrongly given admission. Mr. Shakeel Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner contended, that father of respondent No.4 Dr. Jumma Khan was employed in Health Department and was posted as Demonstrator in Bolan Medical College and thereafter vide Notification dated 4‑1‑1998, he was transferred as Medical Officer, Rural Health Centre, Musa Khel, District Loralai. Learned counsel further stated that though he did not join his services at Musa Khel but still, he happens to be a regular employee of the Health Department, as he has never tendered his resignation. Chaudhry Mumtaz Yousaf, learned counsel for respondent No.4, contended, that the father of respondent No.4, was transferred from Bolan Medical College to Musa Khel in' the year, 1981 and he never joined his place of posting at Musa Khel for a continuous period of five years, therefore, he ceased to be a Government employee and since then, he has been practising privately, thus, the respondent No‑4 has been rightly admitted against the seats reserved for Doctors' children, mentioned in Category "C". We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also examined the record. Record reveals, that after the year, 1981, the father of respondent No.4, did not join his place of posting at Musa Khel and thereafter he remained absent for a continuous period of four to five years from service. In this regard, show‑cause notices were also issued to him and a Certificate has also been produced, wherein it has been mentioned, that the father of respondent No.4, has not received any salary from the Health Department and vide Notification, dated 21st' January, 1981, the father of respondent No.4, alongwith some other was directed to report for duty and in 'case he failed to do. so with a week, she will be relieved from duties. Admittedly the father of respondent No.4, did not join his duties and since then he has never been the employee of the Government and further it has been brought on record, that the father of respondent No.4, Dr. Jumma Khan is serving as a Full‑Time Medical Practitioner and is practising in a private clinic, which fact has not been controverted by the petitioner. Since at the time of granting admission to respondent No.4, it was proved that her father is a Full‑Time Medical Practitioner and is not in arty Government service, thus, in our considered opinion, she has been rightly considered for admission in Category "C". It is worth mentioning, that under Category "C", there were also other candidates, but due to less marks, they did not appear before the Selection Committee and even if the plea of petitioner, for sake of arguments, is accepted, still she will not be entitled for admission under Category "C", in case the respondent No.4 is de-seated then the other contesting candidate would be considered on merit. Thus, on this score as well, the petition is not maintainable. For the foregoing reasons, we see no merits in petition, which is accordingly dismissed, with no order as to costs. H.B.T./91/Q Petition dismissed.