(1.) PETITIONER is a student of 1st respondent-College and he joined the first year M. B. B. S. course on 30-9-2004 and he paid the tuition fee in terms of Annexure-A. Fourth respondent was selected by Common entrance Test and she did not join college on 30-9-2004, the last date for joining the college. Three students who were selected by the Common entrance Test in respect of this college were withdrawn and their admission was cancelled. The above four seats fell vacant for which the petitioner and other three students were admitted on the same date and they also started attending the college. Petitioner has also paid the necessary fee. Petitioner states that on 27-10-2004, a memo dated 21-10-2004 came to be served on the petitioner in terms of Annexure-E stating therein that the fourth respondent has filed a writ petition in this Court by challenging the action of the management in not admitting her to the college and that his admission stands cancelled as his admissions is in excess of 150 admissions. This Court allowed the petition filed by the fourth respondent. Petitioner is questioning this memo in this petition on various grounds. The essential ground is that the cancellation of the petitioner's admission on the ground of an order by this Court is unsustainable since the petitioner was not a party to the petition filed by the fourth respondent. Even otherwise, the admission of the petitioner cannot be treated as an excess admission. Petitioner has raised several other grounds as well.
(2.) NOTICE was issued and the respondents have entered appearance.
(3.) FOURTH respondent has filed a very detailed statement of objection. Fourth respondent states that she was selected by Common Entrance test and in terms of the admission she went to the college but she was not provided admission. She filed a writ petition in this Court and the petition filed by her was allowed. Thereafter she was given admission in terms of Annexure-R5 and subsequently in terms of Annexure-R6 she has paid the necessary fee. She is now attending the college and she essentially says that the petitioner cannot get relief in this petition.