1 SBCivil Writ Petition No.10281/2009 Vikash Hedau v. Registrar, JNV University, Jodhpur & Ors. Date of Order :: 9 th July, 2010 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Mahesh Bora, for the petitioner. Mr. MS Singhvi] Mr. V.Dave ] for the respondents. .... Seeking a direction for the respondent University to give admission to the petitioner in three years LL.B. Course, 2009, this petition for writ is preferred. The factual matrix necessary to be noticed is that the petitioner qualified the examination of Bachelor of Computer Application on 24.10.2009, and then he tendered an admission form to the university authorities to get himself admitted in three years LL.B. Course. The application form aforesaid was not accepted by the university being submitted after expiry of last date. As per the petitioner the stand of the university was erroneous as, as per university 2 guidelines the last date was after ten days from the date of declaration of the result. In the present case the result of the petitioner was declared on 24.10.2009, thus, he would have submitted admission form prior to 4.11.2009. To substantiate the contention reliance is placed by the petitioner on an information booklet issued by the respondent university. It is also stated by counsel for the petitioner that in pursuance to an interim order passed by this Court the petitioner has already appeared in the examination of LL.B. First year, thus, the equity also demands to regularise his admission in LL.B. First year and further in declaration of the result of the examination concerned. I do not find any merit in the arguments advanced. The respondent university has placed on record minutes of the meeting of admission board held on 21.4.2009 settling admission norms and as per that no admission shall be granted after 30.9.2009. In view of the decision of the admission board no wrong is committed by the university officers while not accepting the admission form submitted by the petitioner. True it is, the result of the petitioner was declared on 24.10.2009 and as per information booklet 3 ten days time was available to him to submit admission form, but in no event the instruction aforesaid can prevail over the decision of the admission board which is a statutory body as per ordinance 337 of the Jai Narain Vyas University Ordinance. It is also pertinent to note that the total available number seats for LL.B. First year with the respondent university is 320 and all those seats seats were filled in prior to the date of submission of admission form by the petitioner. In such circumstances even on acceptance of application form from the petitioner could have not been admitted to the course concerned due to non- availability of seats. So far as claim under equity is concerned, that too is not tenable in view of the fact that the petitioner has not attended even a single class in entire year as he was never admitted to the LL.B. Course. Ordinance 355(ii) of the University Ordinance provides that a candidate who after being admitted to LL.B. Course has completed a regular course of study in the university for one academic year, shall be admitted to the first examination in law. The petitioner was neither admitted to LL.B. Course nor he has completed a regular course of study for one academic year and as such his admission to examination itself is in contravention of a statute. It is well settled that no equity can be claimed in violation of the statutes. 4 In view of the discussions made above, this petition for writ is having no force, thus, the same is dismissed. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.