Earlier, Advocate Ijaz Awan representing the petitioner-students argued that the impugned rules were unconstitutional, unjust and even violative to ordinance of the PMDC. He said PMDC had implemented the regulations retrospectively whereas they were required to be rather prospective from the academic sessions of 2020-21 protecting and exhausting all the sessions with effect from 2012-13.
The counsel argued that law had been settled and recognized on the point that executive actions could not have retrospective effects, taking away vested rights of individuals/citizens besides the fact that the executive actions got to be exercised reasonably, justly and rationally. The counsel stated that drastic changes introduced in the impugned regulations regarding eligibility criteria caused extreme frustration as well as it discouraged a large number of aspiring candidates, especially the students seeking admission on foreign seat quota.
He said the PMDC also disqualified the foreign nationality holder students enforcing a requirement of studying last two years abroad. He also questioned the existence of the PMDC saying the council's amended ordinance of 2015 lapsed and was not been made an Act of Parliament.
The counsel asked the court to set the impugned 2016 regulations introduced by the PMDC for being unconstitutional and unwarranted. He further sought directions for the respondents to protect future of the petitioner and other students seeking admission in MBBS.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2017