2026 MLD 1 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Jhelum Homoeopathic medical college, jhelum VS Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of National Health Services Regulations and Coordination, Government of Pakistan Ss.2(c), 2(k), 17 & 21(1)&(2)---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 18, 25 & 199---Admission to recognized institution of Unani or Ayurvedic system of medicine and Homoeopathy---Minimum qualification requirement---Candidates having bachelor or higher education with science given preference---Discrimination, plea of---Vires of law, challenge to---The issue in the present case revolved around the constitutional validity of S.21(2) of the Unani, Ayurvedic and Homoeopathic Practitioners Act, 1965, as amended by the 2021 amendment---The amendment raised the minimum qualification for admission to recognized institutions of Homeopathy from Matriculation with Science to Intermediate (F.Sc. Pre-Medical) or equivalent, giving preference to candidates with higher science education---The petitioner, a homoeopathic medical college, challenged this provision as being discriminatory and violative of fundamental rights under the Constitution, particularly in comparison to the qualifications prescribed for Unani and Ayurvedic institutions---Held: Determination of qualifications for admission to institutions in any field was within the legislative competence of the Government---The Act, 2021 was placed before the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) and after approval, it received assent of the President on 1st December, 2021---The amendment in Subsection (2) of the Act, 1965 in no way offended any of the fundamental rights of the petitioners, moreso, Art.18 of the Constitution as it in no way abridged the right of trade or profession of the petitioners embodied therein---The qualification so enhanced through the amendment was though directly related to the candidates willing to apply for admission in the institutions but none had come forward to challenge the vires of the same---There was a clear distinction between qualifications for homeopathy and unani or ayurvedic system of medicine---Therefore, there was no case of discrimination with the students seeking admission in homeopathy as compared to the unani or ayurvedic system of medicine---Both the fields were not similar and akin---Article 25 of the Constitution ordained that all citizens were equal before law and entitled to equal protection of law and also guaranteed that there would be no discrimination on the basis of sex but by now it is well entrenched principle that equality does not prohibit classification for differently placed persons---Petitioners failed to demonstrate that subsection (2) of S.21 of the Act, 1965, in any manner, offended any of the provisions of the Constitutionor it abridged any of the fundamental right guaranteed therein, as such the present as well as connected petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD