THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21348 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner appeared in EAMCET-2009 and secured the rank of 13705. The admission process gives choice to the candidates to select various institutions in the order of preference. One of the options (option No.8) exercised by the petitioner was Muffakam-jah College of Engineering and Technology, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, respondent No.3-institution, in the Course of Electronics and Communication Engineering. His 11th option was Sri Indu College of Engineering and Technology, Ibrahimpatan. The petitioner belongs to B.C.“E” category. Though he was entitled to be allotted a seat in respondent No.3-institution, he was allotted a seat in Sri Indu College of Engineering and Technology, Ibrahimpatan. The petitioner protested and on realizing their mistake, respondent No.2 allotted a seat in Jai Prakash Narayan College of Engineering and Technology, Mahabubnagar, said to be on the request of the petitioner himself. Even in that institution, the Course C.S.E. was changed into the one of E.C.E. The petitioner challenges the action of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in not allotting the seat in respondent No.3-institution. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the leaned counsel for respondents 1 and 2. The petitioner, no doubt, was entitled to be allotted a seat in respondent No.3-institution. However, on account of mistake on the part of the administration, he was allotted a seat in Sri Indu College of Engineering and Technology, Ibrahimpatan. By the time the mistake was realized, the seats in respondent No.3-institution were full. Therefore, as a compensatory measure, the petitioner was allotted a seat in Jai Prakash Narayan College of Engineering and Technology, Mahabubnagar. Even, the Course was changed. Unless a seat is available in respondent No.3-institution, it would be difficult for this Court to grant any relief to the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that in case any vacant seat is available in E.C.E. Course in respondent No.3-institution, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall consider the feasibility of allotting it to the petitioner. In other words, if the seat is not vacant, the petitioner shall not be entitled for any further relief. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:05.11.2009 Note: Issue cc in three days. (B/o) kdl