Devendra Kumar Arora, J. - (1.) NOTICE on behalf of the respondent no.1 has been accepted by the learned Chief Standing Counsel, on behalf of respondent no. 2, notice has been accepted by Dr. Ravi Kumar and notice on behalf of respondent no.3 has been accepted by Sri Waseeq Uddin Ahmad. With the consent of the parties' counsel, the petition is being disposed of finally at the admission stage. There is no dispute that both the colleges in question have been granted due recognition by the NCTE and thereafter the affiliation has been granted by the concerned University some times in December, 08 and February, 09 for the academic session 2008-09. The colleges have a right to participate in the counselling for the academic session 2008-09, though the counselling has started right from 8th April, 09. We do not find any reason that once the affiliation has been granted to the institutions in question by the University as far back as in December, 08 and February, 09, and recognition by the NCTE has already been granted, then why the colleges are not being allowed to participate in the counselling for the academic session aforesaid. Sri D.K. Upadhyaya, learned Chief Standing Counsel, however, submitted that there cannot be any objection in allowing these colleges to participate in the counselling, but since a list of colleges has been prepared, it may not be possible to allow the petitioner-institutions to participate in the counselling alongwith the institutions for whom the counselling is going on. We, therefore, dispose of the writ petition finally with the direction that the petitioner-institutions shall be allowed to participate in the counselling for the academic session 2008-09 and if for any reason it is not possible to allow them for counselling in the on going schedule, the arrangement shall be made in this regard without any delay keeping in mind that the session is not delayed because of the delay in conselling.;