Top court undoes 2% quota for DAE holders in engineering courses

Bench rules that Diploma of Associate Engineers holders can compete with FSC students on open merit


January 26, 2022

print-news
ISLAMABAD:

The Supreme Court has ruled that the students having Diploma of Associate Engineers (DAE) were eligible for getting admission in to the BSc (Engineering) programme through merit-based open competition with those having passed the FSc degree.

A three-judge bench of the apex court, led by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, declared that the decision of the Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC) to fix 2% quota for the DAE holders in admission to the BSc (Engineering) programme as ultra vires of the Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC) Act, 1976.

“The best way forward is to allow admissions to BSc (Engineering) on open merit and through open competition amongst the FSc and DAE holders,” said an 8-pages judgment authored by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

“Such a level-playing field encourages competition and allows the best of the best amongst the FSc and DAE to be admitted to the BSc (Engineering) Programme,” added the judgment, which reversed the decision of a division bench of the Lahore High Court (LHC) on the matter.

Also read: SC advises courts not to dislodge university decisions

The PEC, in its 15th governing body meeting on March 25, 2015 reserved 2% seats in the BSc (Engineering) programme for the DAE holders, instead of allowing them to apply on open merit, like the candidates holding an FSc degree.

The petitioners, who are holders of DAE with more than 81% marks, took the plea that the PEC did not have such power under the PEC Act. The Supreme Court said that the FSc and DAE holders were at par for admission into BSc (Engineering).

“The learned Division Bench of the High Court has failed to appreciate the scope and extent of Sections 8 and 25A of the Act and the unlawful imposition of reserved seats for DAE holders through the decision dated 25.03.2015 and through Article 2 (C) of the regulations,” the judgment said.

The order also put to an end the issue of equivalence of the FSc and the DAE. Now the holders of the FSc and the DAE are considered eligible for the purposes of seeking admission to the BSc (Engineering) programme under Article 2 of the regulations.

“The counsel for the respondent also failed to justify why DAE should not be considered at par with the FSc students on open merit when both of them are eligible for admission under the Regulations,” Justice Shah wrote in the judgment.

Also read: Sub engineers demand scale upgradation

“In the absence of any power to reserve seats for admission to the BSc (Engineering) programme, both the set of candidates with FSc and DAE have to be treated at par. This parity is created by equal eligibility of DAE for admission,” the judgment added.

“Therefore, the decision of PEC dated 25.03.2015 fixing 2% reserved seats for DAE holders is not only unsustainable under the Act but is also discriminatory. Since PEC cannot reserve seats for any program, the condition of “reserved seats” by the Governing Body under Article 2(C) of the Regulations is also illegal and ultra vires the Act.”

The court also said that another dimension of the case was that on the one side, the regulations allowed both the FSc and DAE holders to be eligible to apply for BSc (Engineering) programme, subject to meeting the requirement of 60% aggregate marks, yet on the other hand, the regulation put a clog on the admission of DAE holders by imposing the condition of reserved seats.

“Other than the fact that the PEC or the Governing Body has no such power to impose such a condition, it is also ex-facie discriminatory against the DAE holders, especially when they are considered eligible for the BSc (Engineering) Programme along with the FSc degree holders,” the order said.

COMMENTS (12)

Dr Masroor Ahmed | 2 years ago | Reply Now the justice have been done. Around the globe the DAE from Pakistan are allowed admission on open Merit however in Pakistan red tape bureaucracy imposed and was supporting the restriction.
Muhammad Younus | 2 years ago | Reply good decision
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ