IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 13778 of 2009 Date of Decision:4.9.2009. Karan Singh Sandhu --Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. A.S. Syan, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 2.9.2009 published in 'Hindustan Times', whereby the respondent no.2-university has invited the candidates, who appeared in CET/AIEEE-2009 for counselling w.e.f. 2.9.2009 to 4.9.2009 and after notifying the cut off date the counselling is permitted to the candidates on the basis of the qualifying examination. The grievance of the petitioner is that earlier on the basis of the notice, issued by the respondent-university for admission on the basis of the qualifying examination, the petitioner was admitted. The petitioner accordingly seeks a direction that his admission be not cancelled. This issue was earlier considered by this Court in CWP No. 12024 of 2009 decided on 25.8.2009, wherein the earlier notification, issued by the respondent-university for counselling on the basis of qualifying examination was quashed and the following directions have been issued: “In view of the above circumstances, the impugned notification dated 4.8.2009 and the action of respondents to hold counselling on the basis of qualifying examination (10+2 examination or diploma in Engineering/Pharmacy) without first exhausting the list of CWP. No. 13778 of 2009 -2- desirable/interested candidates from the CET/AIEEE examinees is hereby quashed. Respondents are directed to issue a public notice, notifying the number of unfilled vacancies/courses in all the institutions, located in the State of Punjab and affiliated to the concerned universities forthwith and give first preference to such of the candidates who have appeared in CET/AIEEE-2009 for seeking consideration for admission against 85% and 15% quota by fixing a cut off date. If, after granting admission to CET/AIEEE appeared candidates, any seat(s) remain unfilled, the admission may be made on the basis of the qualifying examination.” The notice (Annexure P-3) has been issued in implementation of the aforesaid judgement. Hence, the relief claimed by the petitioner cannot be granted. No merit, petition dismissed. However, the petitioner is entitled to apply for counselling as and when the counselling on the basis of the qualifying examination is again conducted by the respondent-university as per directions contained in the aforesaid judgement. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 4.9.2009 lucky