2006 PLP 3156 (YLR)

DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, J.

Petitioner Muhammad Irshad has filed this constitution petition and has prayed for issuance of direction/writ to the respondents to consider him for admission A in Ist year M.B.,B.S. on the reserved seat of Amazai as he is holding domicile of that area but was refused admission and instead respondent No.4 Miss Fatima Rafique was given admission.

2. Argument heard in detail and available record perused.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he is domiciled of Amazai a backward area and one seat for admission in M.B.,B.S. was reserved by the Provincial Assembly for this area through resolution passed in 1986. His further grievance is that Utmanzai, adjoining area was not included in Amazai thus respondent No.4 who is domiciled of that area was not entitled to admission in the Medical College (M.B.,B.S. Ist Year) on the said reserved seat and that he has qualified for the said reserved seat in the session for the year 2004-05.

4. Respondents were put on notice who filed written statements. Respondent No.4 in her written statement in para.3 of the preliminary objection has referred to W.P.No.232 of 2002 decided on 7-12-2000 and W.P. No.109 of 2005 dismissed on 24-2-2005 (PLD 2005 Peshawar Page-116) in which, she, the replying respondent was arrayed as respondent No.5 thus has taken the plea that the matter once adjudicated upon in writ jurisdiction by the High Court cannot be reopened in the present writ petition because it would violate the principle that a writ cannot be issued to the High Court or by one Bench of the High Court to another Bench. The official respondents have also supported the stance of respondent No.4.

5. The moot point having direct bearing on this petition is as to whether a candidate domiciled of Utmanzai, adjoining Amazai area can put a valid claim on the said reserved seat or not. This question was earlier raised in W.P. No.232 of 2000 which was decided on 7-12-2000 by a Division Bench of this Court. In para.5 of the said judgment reference has been made to a notification/order whereby different areas across the Indus River of Haripur District have been merged into Amazai area of Haripur District. The Governor General Order No.1 of 1952 published in the Gazette of 7th February, 1952 is available on page 6 with the written statement and through this order Utamanzai area including Union Council Kaya and other Union Councils situated on the right bank of the River Indus have been merged into one block along with Amazai on the request of public representative. In the judgment .of this Court dated 7-12-2000 delivered in W.P. No.232 of 2000, it was held that no additional seat has been allocated after the merger of the said area into Amazai area while on the other hand Gadoon area always been treated different then Amazai and Utmanzai. It was further held that the only relief which the Court could grant was to allow the then petitioner before the Court to compete for the seat reserved for Amazai with others. This being the legal and factual possession and according to the written statement filed by respondent No.4 confirmed by the learned counsel of the official respondents including Chairman Joint Admission Committee, respondent No.4 was possessed of High merit as compared to the petitioner, thus, she was given preference and was allowed admission in the Ist Year M.B.,B.S. on the said quota seat reserved for the said backward area. For the above stated reasons, both on legal and factual premises, the petitioner has made out no case whatsoever for the indulgence of this Court, accordingly, this petition being without legal merit is dismissed. There are the detailed reasons for out short order dated 22-3-2006. H.B.T./171/P?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.