PARKASH KUMAR vs CHAIRMAN, SELECTION COMMITTEE, BALOCHISTAN
This civil appeal arose out of a challenge to the rejection of the appellant's application for admission to Baluchistan Engineering College against reserved seats for Kachhi District. The appellant's candidate claim was initially refused and deemed barred by the High Court under the principle of res judicata because he had studied outside Baluchistan Province during certain educational years. The core legal questions before the Supreme Court were whether executive or administrative determinations operate as res judicata to bar subsequent reconsiderations, and whether the rejection of the appellant's claim was discriminatory and arbitrary. The Supreme Court held that administrative and executive decisions do not attract the principles of res judicata or finality so as to preclude correction or alteration. Finding that the appellant's father was a resident of Jhal Magsi, and that his siblings had been granted admission and employment on the same basis, the Court declared the rejection arbitrary, unreasonable, and discriminatory. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and directed that the appellant be considered for admission on merit without mark deduction for lapse of time.
- Does the principle of res judicata apply to administrative or executive decisions?
- Can an executive decision or determination be altered or corrected despite a prior contrary determination?
- Whether treating similarly situated candidates differently regarding provincial residence for college admission amounts to unlawful discrimination?
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.---The appellant was a candidate for admission in the Baluchistan Engineering College against the reserved seats of Kachhi District. He was granted a local certificate by the District Magistrate. On finding that he had been studying from 7th till F.Sc. Pre-Engineering outside Baluchistan Province at Shahdadkot in Sindh Province, he was not considered eligible in the previous year. When he applied the next year, the decision of the previous year was held to be a bark He challenged that decision in the High Court. The High Court came to the conclusion that the previous order holding the appellant to be ineligible had attained finality and operated so far as principle of it is concerned, as res judicata.
2. We had at the hearing called for the relevant records in order to ascertain the correct position and after having examined it have come to a different conclusion. In the first place, so far as the executive decisions, orders and determinations are concerned, the correction of it or alteration of it cannot be avoided on the ground of finality or res judicata.
3. We find that his father at the time of entry into service has shown his residence in Jhal Magsi. The appellant had got education in Jhal Magsi till his father got transferred from there and he had of necessity to move to Shahdad Kot where he had a relative. His brother in similar circumstances was treated as a resident of Jhal Magsi and given admission in Bolan Medical College. His another brother was recruited in service on the basis of his residence in Jhal Magsi. In the circumstances, the rejection of the claim of the appellant was arbitrary and unreasonable and also manifestly discriminatory.
4. In the circumstances, we accept this appeal, set aside the rejection of the claim of the appellant.
The learned Advocate-General has assured us that he would be considered for admission this year without deducting any marks for the lapse of time. We hope that this undertaking will be honoured and the merit of the appellant determined accordingly.