AHMED AZEEM vs PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Karachi and another
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal impugning the dismissal of a constitutional petition by the High Court of Sindh, which had challenged the refusal to grant the petitioner admission in a medical college in Karachi. The petitioner was originally admitted to the defunct Vohra Medical College in 1991, which was later closed, leading to the absorption of other students into various medical colleges under a government policy. The core legal question is whether a student displaced by the closure of a medical college can claim a vested right to be accommodated in a specific medical college based on domicile. The Supreme Court held that the right of admission is purely discretionary and cannot be claimed as a vested right, and that domicile rules regarding the submission of applications do not confer an entitlement to admission in a college situated in a particular district. The petition was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused.
- Whether admission to a medical college can be claimed as a vested right?
- Does a district domicile confer an absolute right to be admitted in a medical college situated in that particular district?
- Whether the refusal to grant admission in a specific medical college warrants interference when the student was offered admission under policy?
' ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.-By this petition, petitioner Ahmed Azim has sought leave to appeal impugning the Order dated27-9-2001 passed by learned Division Bench of High Court of Sindh, Karachi in Constitutional Petition No,D-615 of 2001 whereby the same was dismissed in limine alongwith listed application.
2. The petitioner and several other students were admitted in M.B.B.S. Course in Vohra Medical College. Karachi in the year 1991. They had completed two years (Ist Professional) whereafter the Government of Sindh closed the College and the University of Karachi discontinued its affiliation. In accordance with Government policy the students were aborbed in different Medical Colleges except the petitioner whose name missed from the list of such students. Accordingly, he agitated his grievance before the Provincial Ombudsman and it was on his orders dated 30-8-2000 he was offered admission in Chandka Medical College, Larkana. He, however, did not join but claimed that as a matter of right he should be admitted either in Dow or Sindh Medical College at Karachi. He made several representations to the authorities but all in vain.
3. We have heard Mr. Muzaffarul Haq, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of the petitioner in detail and have gone through impugned order as well as record and proceedings of the case in minute particulars.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the petitioner has been discriminated by not giving admission in Dow or Sindh Medical College. Karachi for no fault on his part. According to rule 8 of the Prospectus issued by Government of Sindh, Health Department with regard to the admission in Medical Colleges of Sindh, the petitioner being domiciled in Karachi was entitled to be accommodated in any Medical College at Karachi. He lastly contended that since the admission was allowed on 'Self-Finance Basis' and he had to deposit Rs, One lac per year which he could not offer due to sudden death of his father, as such his matter would have been considered on compassionate grounds.
5. Admittedly 250 students of the defunct Vohra Medical College of Province of Sindh on 'Self- Financing Scheme', the petitioner was also offered such an opportunity but he did not avail the same. The right of admission is purely a discretionary right of the Government and it cannot be claimed as a vested right by the petitioner or anybody else. The Prospectus of the year 1991-92 referred above pertains to the entire Medical Colleges of Province of Sindh, wherein the Rules and the Polices for submitting applications/forms and seeking admission in various Colleges are prescribed, as such, the condition of domicile in a particular District claiming admission in a Medical College situated in that District cannot confer the right to get admission in that particular District. Rule 8 of the Prospectus deals with the submission of applications/forms and required documents to the Principals of the Medical Colleges' where the candidates are domiciled only. So far the admission in the different Medical Colleges of Sindh is concerned, it is open on merits as provided by the Rules. The learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order which is accordingly maintained.
' In the result, the petition is dismissed and leave to appeal isrefused.