KARACHI, Jan 4: The Sindh High Court put on Friday the advocate-general Sindh and others on notice for Jan 8 in a constitutional petition filed by two students aggrieved by the conduct of IBA entrance test for admission to medical colleges.

The petition of Mukesh Kumar and Permashari had come up before a division bench comprising Justice Sabihuddin Ahmed and Justice Zia Pervez. The petitioners, who were represented by Ghulam Qadir, have also made the chairman of IBA, vice chancellor of Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Hyderabad, principals of the DMC and the SMC, Karachi, Chandka Medical College, Larkana, and others respondents in the case.

Mukesh Kumar resides at Mithi.

The petitioner had passed the SSC Examination in Science Group in 1998 from the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Hyderabad, with “A” grade obtaining highest marks. He also passed HSC Examination in 2001 with Grade “B” securing 719 marks out of 1,100.

The petitioner, being a resident of Tharparkar District, had also obtained domicile certificate and PRC from the district magistrate.

In order to obtain admission to medical college, the petitioner appeared in the Entrance Test for Admission to MBBS/BDS Medical and Dental Colleges of Sindh, held at Hyderabad on October 28, 2001. But the respondent No 1, the provincial government through the health secretary, ordered holding fresh test on the ground that the paper was found to have leaked. Thus the petitioner on this account could not succeed.

Another test was announced to be held on Nov 15, but that time as well there had been some complaints that the papers were out and no proper arrangements for ensuring transparency were made. Consequently, the results were arranged by the respondent No 2 (IBA) due to which the petitioner was declared to have obtained 74.18 per cent marks.

The petitioner and many others were not satisfied with the decision of the respondent No 1 ordering the second test and of the respondent No 2 who declared the result of the second test, as there had been general hue and cry that this time also the test was not held fairly, and papers were out.

The petitioner and others protested against such decision of the respondents Nos 1 and 2, but the protest was not considered.

The petitioner was of the bona fide impression that the second test was arranged only in order to accommodate some interested persons at the cost of deserving persons. Even the government of Sindh, the respondent No 1, was not satisfied with the conduct of the tests which was reflected in newspaper clippings. An FIR bearing No 97/2001 was also lodged by the director of the IBA, Karachi University, against the staff involved in managing the results, at Mubeena Town police station in Karachi on the application of respondent Ms Kavita.

Ultimately, on Dec 28, the LUMHS, DMC and SMC issued revised merit list of successful candidates, but unfortunately the name of the petitioner did not find a place in it. However, some of those who could not succeed in the first list, including the private respondents, were picked up on the basis of the second test.

It was further submitted that in the first merit list the petitioner was placed at serial No 2, respondent Sandeep was at No 26, and respondents Kavita and Babu were at Nos 23 and 24. However, in the subsequent list respondent Nos 8,9 and 10 had been placed at serial Nos 9, 20 and 21.

The petitioner contended that he had been knocked out by the respondents Nos 1 and 2, without any justification which was very disappointing rather shocking to him. His future career was being ruined by such mala fide tactics and by that his fundamental rights had been violated which were fully secured by the constitution.

The petitioner was given to understand that the respondent No 1 had no authority under the rules to cancel the first test and to order second one, without holding proper inquiry and collecting evidence. Therefore, the very act was arbitrary, mala fide, and in violation of the provisions of the constitution.

Under the aforesaid circumstances, when the two entrance tests were being criticized and had lost credibility, which even the respondent No 1 had not favoured, the best way to solve the issue was to decide the fate of students on the basis of the total marks obtained by them in the SSC and HSC examinations, rather than preparing the list by way of pick and choose.

In view of the above the petitioner prayed the court to declare the act of the respondent No 1 of cancelling the first entrance test and ordering second test and further the result compiled by the respondent No 2 in the second test held on Nov 15, 2001, as well as revised list issued by the LUMHS, DMC and SMC illegal, mala fide, violative of his fundamental rights, and as such cancelled.

To direct the respondent No 1 either to include the name of the petitioner as he was declared successful in the first list of the entrance test, or to direct the respondents (medical colleges) to decide the cases of the students while preparing the merit lists, on the basis of total marks obtained by them in the SSC and HSC examinations, as both the entrance tests had lost its credibility, and allow admissions to students, including the petitioner, on that basis. To direct the respondents Nos 3 to 7 not to act on the second test result of the respondent No 2 by accepting the admissions forms on the basis of revised list.