IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.2697 of 2009 Date of Decision: March 05, 2009 Gurkiran Kaur Abdal .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra & Another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Akshay Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate, for the respondent No.1. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This civil writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing Letter dated 5.2.2009 (Annexure P-3) vide which the admission of the petitioner to B.Ed. (Regular) Course for the Session 2008-09 has been cancelled. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has more marks in qualifying examination as compared to many other students. The petitioner was given admission on 28.11.2008 i.e. before the cut off date prescribed CWP No.2697 of 2009 [2] by the Division Bench of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.17284 of 2008, tiled ‘Association of Education Colleges (Self-Financing) of Haryana vs. State of Haryana & Others’, decided on 21.11.2008. In case the order of cancellation of admission is allowed to stand, one seat would go waste and it would be against the spirit of the judgment. The judgment rendered in Civil Writ Petition No.17284 of 2008 has been considered by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.1060 of 2009, titled ‘Ms. Pooja vs. Kurukshetra University’, decided on 16.2.2009 and relief has been given to that petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent has not been able to distinguish the facts of the present case with those in Ms. Pooja’s case (supra). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the petitioner was given admission on 28.11.2008. It is not in dispute that the petitioner got higher marks in qualifying examination i.e. B.A., as compared to many other students admitted in the College. The eligibility of the petitioner for admission is also not in dispute. Civil Writ Petition No.17284 of 2008 was filed by Association of Education Colleges (Self-Financing) of Haryana which was dealt with by a Division Bench of this Court. The facts brought out before this Court were that 28,000 seats were CWP No.2697 of 2009 [3] lying vacant and unfilled for admission to B.Ed. course in the State of Haryana. Prayer was made that the merit in qualifying exam be taken into account and admission be granted so as not to waste the resources. The petition was allowed in part on 21.11.2008. It has been held that the colleges duly recognized by NCTE and affiliated to the universities who have been included in the list of colleges eligible for admitting students by the University by holding the CET shall be free to fill up the seats that are lying vacant by admitting suitable candidates eligible for such admissions to B.Ed. courses. It has further been held that the admission would be made only on the basis of merit of the candidates in the qualifying examination. The colleges shall conclude the admission process and submit a list of the candidates admitted by them to the university concerned by 05.12.2008. Such of the colleges, so as to make admissions against the excess seats pursuant to the order, shall take steps to ensure that special classes are held by them so that the candidates are in a position to complete 180 study days and other requirements of attendance and practice teaching etc. The academic standard stipulated for the course shall, however, not be relaxed. The admissions granted shall not exceed the intake capacity of the colleges. In the case of Ms. Pooja (supra), similar CWP No.2697 of 2009 [4] issue has been considered by this Court and relief has been allowed on the analogy that seat would go waste in the College which would result in wastage of resources. It would be against the spirit of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.17284 of 2008. Considering the above, this petition is allowed. Letter dated 5.2.2009 (Annexure P-3) is hereby quashed. The petitioner accordingly would be allowed to pursue her studies. (AJAI LAMBA) March 05, 2009 JUDGE avin