WPMS 1790/2011 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Sri R.C. Tamta, Advocate for the petitioner. Sri Lokendra Dobhal, Advocate holding the brief of Ms. Geeta Parihar, Advocate for the respondents. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at some length, the Court finds that on account of poor academic performance the petitioner was placed under probation during the second semester of the academic session 2009- 2010. In spite of being placed on probation, the petitioner did not improve and did not maintain the required C.G.P.A. of 6.000 out of 10.00. As per Regulation 44-A, the petitioner was dropped from the University on account of poor academic performance with no right for re-admission. On these aspects, the petitioner has not disputed the factual averments but only submitted that for the academic session 2010-2011, 34 students who have been dropped under the same provision, are now being re-considered for re-admission in the college and consequently, submitted that the petitioner’s case should also be reconsidered. In the opinion of the Court, the mere fact that the 34 students, as mentioned in Annexure-6 of the writ petition, are likely to be reconsidered, cannot give a reasonable right to the petitioner to approach this Court for a similar relief. At this moment, no such student who has been finally dropped, been given re-admission. Consequently, this Court does not find any ground to direct the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) 26-08-2011 SP