IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCAL AT NAINIAL WRIT PETITION NO.775 (MS) OF 2006 Km. Deepmala, D/o Sri Karan Pal Singh, R/o Tehsil Road Laxar, Haridwar, Uttaranchal. …………..Petitioner. Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal through Secretary Higher Education, Dehradun. 2. Vice Chancellor, H.N.B.G.U. Sri Nagar Garhwal. 3. Registrar H.N.B.G.U. Sri Nagar Garhwal. ……………Respondents. Dated: 22.06.2006 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri Atul Bahuguna & Sanjeev Singh, Advocate for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for the State. Both the parties have agreed that let the matter be finally disposed of at the admission stage. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to provide 15 additional marks of teacher wards to the petitioner and also direct the respondents to consider the petitioner for B.Ed Session 2006. Briefly stated, the petitioner has passed her graduation in the year, 2000 and thereafter in the year, 2002, she appeared in the post graduation examination with English From Chaudhary Charan Singh University. In the year,. 2005, she appeared for the B.Ed. Entrance Examination, 2005 of Hemwati Nandan Bhauguna University, Sri Nagar Garhwal. Thereafter, the University has published a list of candidates, who were eligible for the next counseling on 16.06.2006 in the B.Ed. Management Quota and the last group which was selected according to the merit, the qualifying marks is to the extent of 226, when in point of fact, the petitioner has secured only 213 marks. The petitioner has requested for 15 additional marks in order to qualify in the merit list and approached the authority concerned in pursuance of the Item No.12 of B.Ed Admission From, 2005. The same is quoted below:- fu;ekad fu;ekad dk fooj.k ftlds vad pkgrs gS izek.k&i= nsus okyk vf/kdkjh vfrfjDr vad izek.ki= 1- ekU;rk izkIr ek0 fo0 ds 2- f'k{k.ksRrj deZpkjh dk okMZ ftyk f'k{kk vf/kdkjh gfj}kj 15 vadks dk ;ksx 15 According to the petitioner, she has approached the authority by making representation, but the same has not been decided. The respondent no. 2, therefore, is directed to dispose of the representation and consider the case of the petitioner within 15 days from the date of production of the certified copy of the order. Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 22.06.2006 Rathour