PIL 78/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MADAN B. LOKUR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AK GOSWAMI The grievance of the petitioners in this Public Interest Litigation is mainly di rected against an advertisement dated 11.8.2009 issued by Respondent No.2 inviti ng applications for admission to the three years Course of Diploma in Medicine a nd Rural Health Care (DMRHC) in the Medical Institute, Jorhat for the Session 20 09. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the advertisement is not in conformity with the provisions of the Person with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and that i t is also in violation of the orders passed by this Court in PIL 34/2008 (Smti.A nju Talukdar vs. State of Assam & Ors.) decided on 17.12.2008. When this matter came up for admission on 23.9.2009, this Court had issued notic e to the respondents and had directed the respondents not to fill up 3% of the a vailable seats until further orders. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 states at the Bar that no applications were received from persons with disabilities pursuant to the impugned advertisement d ated 11.8.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioners says that the terms and eligibility conditio ns given in the impugned advertisement were extremely disadvantageous and that i s why no person with disabilities had put in any application. Without going into the correctness or otherwise of the contention of learned cou nsel for the parties, we are of the view that the challenge to the impugned adve rtisement dated 11.8.2009 has now become infructuous. Learned counsel for the petitioners however states that the principle of law nee ds to be determined. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 says that he has filed an affidavit in the R egistry today. The Registry should place the affidavit on record. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 says that the errors committed by the respon dents in the earlier advertisement dated 11.8.2009 have now been rectified in re spect of admissions for the Session 2010. He has shown to us a copy of the adver tisement dated 17.8.2010 published in the Dainik Janambhumi wherein the objectio ns raised by the petitioners have been met. It is stated that pursuant to the ad vertisement dated 17.8.2010 only one person with disabilities has put in an appl ication and his case will be considered in accordance with law. Since the advertisement dated 17.8.2010 has not been challenged by the petitione rs and it appears to be in conformity with the provisions of the Persons with Di sabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Ac t, 1995 as well as the judgment rendered by this Court in PIL 34/2008, no furthe r order is required to be passed in this PIL. However, we make it clear that the petitioners may move a petition afresh in cas e any advertisement issued is not in conformity with law and the judgment of thi s Court passed in PIL 34/2008. With the above directions and observations, this petition is disposed of.