IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9729 of 2008 SHAISTA ANJUM'SHEBY' Versus THE L.N.MITHILA UNIVERSITY &OR ----------- 3. 17.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, for the University as also Respondent-College. The claim in this writ application is for a mandamus to hold examination for B.Ed. Course for the Sessions 1998-1999 for which the petitioner claims to have deposited the fee and attended classes. The Respondents have relied upon certain orders of this Court in CWJC No. 4764 of 2006 and 14788 of 2006 with regard to similar claim for the Sessions 1997-1998 and 1996-1997. This Court declined to entertain such belated claim, more so when the course content and eligibility had undergone changes. This Court finds no merit in this writ application, which appears to be barred by gross delay and laches defeating the rights by subsequent events also. The petitioner is alone to be blamed for her predicament in not having been vigilant. Learned counsel for the petitioner is right in his submission that if she applies afresh for admission in the B.Ed. course in the college in question and if she fulfils the present eligibility, the Respondents are required to consider her admission afresh, notwithstanding the refusal of this Court to interfere in the matter. In that event, if the petitioner secures admission, pays tuition fee and furnishes adequate proof of having deposited the examination fees on the earlier occasion, subject to a demand for 2 any additional examination fees by reason of any enhancement of fees in the meantime, the Respondents shall be obliged to consider the adjustment of the earlier fees paid as claimed by the petitioner. This application stands dismissed with observations. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)