Pakistan Case LawQAISAR KHAN Versus PROVINCE OF BALOCHISTAN through Secretary, Department of Education, Quetta and others
This appeal arises from the dismissal of a constitutional petition by the High Court, which held that the petition was not maintainable due to the non-joinder of a candidate (Muhammad Iqbal) who had secured fewer marks than the appellant. The appellant had sought admission to an Engineering College in Balochistan, which was denied on the ground that he had completed his education outside the province. The appellant challenged this decision, specifically targeting the admission of another candidate, Ghulam Mustafa, who had also studied outside the province but was granted admission. The core legal question was whether the High Court erred in dismissing the petition on the technical ground of non-joinder of a party against whom no relief was sought. The Supreme Court held that the dismissal on such technical grounds was improper, particularly where the appellant's case was at par with the respondent (Ghulam Mustafa) and no relief was claimed against the omitted party. The appeal was allowed, and the case was remanded to the High Court for a decision on merits.
- Can a constitutional petition be dismissed solely on the ground of non-joinder of a party against whom no relief is claimed?
- Is it necessary to implead all successful candidates in a petition challenging an admission process when the petitioner only seeks relief against a specific candidate?
ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.---This appeal by leave of the Court is directed against the judgment of the High Court dated 18-1-1992.
2.The facts of the case are that the appellant applied for admission in the Engineering College, Khuzdar, against one of the seats reserved for Jafarabad District. The appellant received his education after 8th Class from outside Balochistan. The Selection Committee rejected the candidature of the appellant on the ground that he had studied outside Balochistan. The appellant filed a Constitution petition against the order of the Selection Committee in the High Court. In this Constitution petition Muhammad Iqbal one of the successful candidates was impleaded as a party. The said petition was withdrawn by the appellant with the permission to file a fresh petition for the reasons that one Ghulam Mustafa was not impleaded as a party to those proceedings. He had lesser marks than the appellant. The appellant filed a fresh Constitution petition impleading Ghulam Mustafa as the respondent but he did not implead Muhammad Iqbal. The learned High Court dismissed the petition on the ground that the same was not maintainable as Muhammad Iqbal had secured less marks than the appellant but he was not joined as the respondent.
3.Leave to Appeal was granted to consider whether a direction could be made to the appellant to implead Muhammad Iqbal as a party to such petition and that the petition should not have been dismissed on such technical ground?
4.Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant has not impleaded Muhmmad Iqbal as he had received all his education in Balochistan, therefore, his case is not identical to that of the appellant. He submitted that Ghulam Mustafa had also received his education from 8th Class to B.Sc. From outside Balochistan but he was allowed admission by the Selection Committee. He submitted that the case of the appellant and Ghulam Mustafa is at par and in case the appellant is successful, then Ghulam Mustafa would lose the seat. He submitted that he does not claim any relief against Muhammad Iqbal.
5.The appeal is allowed. The case is remanded to the High Court for decision on merits between the appellant and Ghulam Mustafa. No order as to costs.
Judges on this bench
- Manzoor Hussain Sial807 judgments