Prospectus of Medical Colleges of Sindh

Students of the defunct medical college were given admissions in other medical colleges in their city of residence on self-finance basis

Similar offer was made to the petitioner but he could not avail the same due to lack of finances

Grievance of the petitioner was that the authorities had given him admission in a medical college away from his home town

Validity

Right of admission was a discretionary right of the Government and it could not be claimed as a vested right

Prospectus of Medical Colleges in Sindh (1991-92) pertained to entire medical colleges of the Province wherein rules and policies for submitting applications/forms and seeking admission in various colleges was prescribed

Student, after availing four chances as provided in R.8 of the Prospectus, must vacate the seat for other deserving,candidates

Principles.

Prospectus of Medical Colleges of Sindh Rr. 1, 2 & 3???Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199???Constitutional petition???Educational institution???Migration from one medical college to another???Petitioner, a female student of Sindh Medical College, Karachi was allowed migration to Dow Medical College, Karachi in relaxation of rules for migration contained in Prospectus for Medical Colleges of Sindh 1996?97, but despite such migration Principal of Dow Medical College to which petitioner was migrated, did not enter petitioner's name in relevant register and other record of students admitted to that college???Petitioner, who was a doctor's child in category of "children of medical doctors domiciled in Province", was occupant of a reserved seat, could not be allowed migration under R.1(i) of Prospectus for Medical Colleges of Sindh, 1996?97???Authority, under R.3 of the Prospectus, no doubt had power to relax conditions but that could be done only in "special case" which signified a hardship case or one where just circumstances existed for deviating from the Rules???In absence of such just circumstances, case of petitioner did not fall in category of "special case" and she could not be allowed to migrate from one college to the other???Petitioner was ordered to be sent back to her parent institution the Sindh Medical College in circumstances.

Rule III(2)(ii), (iii) & (iv) of Prospectus for Medical Colleges, Sindh for 1996-97 provided that every candidate for admission to 1996-97 Session, must fall within one of three categories mentioned in that rule, whereas case of candidate did not fall within any of the said categories

Candidate had cleared his Intermediate Pre-Medical Examination in 1995 from India and he applied for admission during Session 1996-97 whereas according to R.III(2)(ii)(iii) & (iv) of Prospectus for Medical Colleges, Sindh for 1996-97, only those candidates who had passed Intermediate Examination in year 1996 were eligible for Session 1996-97

Authority had rightly found that candidate was not eligible to be considered for admission in the First Professional M.B.,B.S. Course during Academic Session 1996-97 because he had cleared his Intermediate Examination in 1995

Formula deducting 20 marks of candidate was also rightly applied by Authority.

Petitioner complained that although she was allowed migration to specified medical college in relaxation of rules as a special case, and even though she was attending classes in that college, yet Principal of that college was not entering her name in relevant register and other record of students admitted to that college

Petitioner being doctor's child in category of "children of medical doctors domiciled in the Province" was occupant of reserved seat, therefore, could not take benefit of R.2 of the Prospectus which allowed migration on specified reasons, wherein persons admitted on reserved seats were not included

Government in accordance with R.3 of the Prospectus, although had the power to relax conditions, yet such course could be adopted in "special case"

No comments having been filed by the Government, Court had to draw conclusion which could not be favourable to petitioner, all the more so when petitioner herself had not come up with any justifiable reasons

While dismissing petitioner's Constitutional petition High Court directed Secretary Health to submit explanation in writing within 15 days as to what were the circumstances which compelled him far passing order of migration

At petitioner's request that she might not be able to go back and continue her studies in her original medical college from where she had purportedly migrated, Secretary Health was directed to undo the wrong which had been done and to send petitioner back to her parent institution within specified time.

S. 17-Pakistan Citizenship Rules, 1952, R. 23-Sind Permanent Residence Certificate Rules, 1971, R. 3-Educational Institution Admission-Prospectus for admission in Medical Colleges of Sind 1985-86-Words "domicile" and "residence", not defined in Prospectus - Domicile certificate is granted under Pakistan Citizenship Act, 1951 and permanent residence certificate is issued under Sind Permanent Residence Certificate Rules, 1971Person possessing such certificates, held, would be deemed to be domicile and permanent resident of the District mentioned therein unless such certificates were cancelled by competent authority or were proved otherwise.-[Educational institutions].

Where criteria for admission in medical college prescribed by prospectus for current academic year was different to previous year, candidate's right to admission, held, would be governed by policy and rules prescribed by prospectus for current academic year and not by rules prescribed by prospectus of previous year

Benefit conferred in previous year (1983-84) having been withdrawn by fresh prospectus issued in academic year (1984-85), petitioner was rightly considered disentitled to get admission in current academic year

High Court declined to interfere with decision of respondents in circumstances.

R. 12-Denial of admission to Medical College for want of P. R. C.-Petitioner passing Intermediate Examination in December, 1980 obtaining 73.1 % marks and entitled to 2 % additional marks as well for N. C. C. certificate-Petitioner applying for admission to 1st, year M. B., B. S. of Medical College on 9-2-1981-College authorities declining application for want of P. R. C.-Deputy Commissioner on remand of case by Commissioner, granting P. R. C. to petitioner on I'll-6-1981-Admissions already- completed in March; 1981-Academic year of 1st year wherefore petitioner had applied already expired-Held, petitioner cannot be granted admission in same academic year but entitled to admission under r. 12.-[Educational institution].

Art. 199 and Prospectus of Medical Colleges, 1980-81, Chap. IV, r. 5-Admission in Medical Colleges-Candidates failing to secure admission in first academic year for want of seats-To be offered such vacant seats on merits from waiting list-Offering vacant seats to students already admitted, held, results in reconsidering admissions already made on merits and general review of all allocations made-Such procedure could not be considered reasonable-First Academic Year practically over and candidates on waiting list may not be offered seats likely to fall vacant petitioner's case of transfer/ admission from N to K where seats fell vacant requires consideration in circumstances.[Educational institutions].

R. 17 (b) (i)-Additional 5 marks-Petitioner having passed G. I. E. from Cambridge and London Universities as well as litter (Science) (Pre-Medical) from Board of Intermediate Education Karachi refused admission to first year of M.B., B.S. course on ground of his adjusted marks in Intermediate examination being 636 whereas marks of last student granted admission being 641-Petitioner claiming to be entitled to 5 additional marks under r. 17 (b) (t) of prospectus of M. B. B. S. course for Medical Colleges of Sind for 1979/80-Grade equivalency certificate issued by Board of Intermediate Education converting grades into marks in respect of G. C.

R. 11-All columns of Appendix I (certificate of Principal of College) and Appendix III (District Magistrate's certificate) required by rule to be filled to correctly-Appendices though required to be signed by Principal and District Magistrate respectively at places indicated for purpose, yet failure of such officers to sign in space provided for their signatures, held, cannot be described as failure to fill in columns of Appendices, no column in appendices existing for making such signatures-Question whether Prospectus of Colleges some form of subordinate legislation or only a document in nature of contract being shrouded in mystery, rules in Prospectus to be construed very strictly Petitioner/candidate's mistake in obtaining signatures of her Principal and of District Magistrate on separate sheets instead of on appendices, held, did not consequently amount to failure to fill in columns of Appendix correctly. -[Educational institutions].