SCA/7123/1998 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7123 of 1998 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= PARMAR ARVINDKUMAR V - Petitioner(s) Versus VICE CHANCELLOR & 5 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR NR TANDEL for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR NV ANJARIA for Respondent(s) : 1, MR MANGESH R MENGDEY for Respondent(s) : 1, MS MAITHILI D MEHTA for Respondent(s) : 1, RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2, MS KJ BRAHMBHATT for Respondent(s) : 3, RULE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent(s) : 4 - 5. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 02/04/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT SCA/7123/1998 2/3 JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner has preferred the petition for appropriate writ to absorb the petitioner in M.Pharm Post-Graduate Degree by granting him admission and the prayer is to ignore the admission rules adopted by the respondents which are violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It is also prayed that by the petitioners that Rule 6(A) pertaining to the unreasonable criteria adopted for Scheduled Caste candidate be not considered by the University and consequently, the relief may be granted for enrollment of the petitioner in M.Pharm Degree course in the current academic year of 1988. 2. It appears from the record that at the time when the matter was considered, no interim relief has been granted and as a result thereof, the petitioner who was seeking admission in M.Pharm course in the year 1998 is not granted admission. The period of about 10 years has passed and had the admission granted, it would have been over in the year 2000. The seats on which the admission was being claimed has also lapsed by afflux of time. 3. Under these circumstances, no useful purpose would be served in examining the questions which are raised in the present petition. It can be said that the petition has become infructuous by afflux of time. Hence, the petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. SCA/7123/1998 3/3 JUDGMENT 4. Rule discharged. No order as to costs. (JAYANT PATEL, J.) *bjoy