- (1.) In response to an advertisement dated July 7,1989 issued by respondent No. 2, the petitioner applied for admission to the M.Sc. Mechanical Engineering course for the session 1989-90. He was, however, not granted admission on the ground that he had only four years professional experience instead of five years as prescribed in conditions mentioned in the Admission Rules annexed with the admission form. The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the action of the respondents in refusing the admission to him.
(2.) The Motion Bench by its order dated September 14,1989 directed the respondent to grant provisional admission to the petitioner at his own risk and responsibility which was subject to the final decision of the writ petition. The petitioner was consequently granted admission to the said course which was of the duration of two years. While admitting the writ petition on January 23, 1990 for final hearing, the Motion Bench after noticing that the petitioner and already been given provisional admission as per order dated September 14, 1989 further directed that the said admission will continue and the results of the petitioner will be declared from time to time. Consequently, in compliance of the directions of the Court as noticed above, the respondent-University declared the results of the petitioner and he has since been declared to have passed the course. In these circumstances, no useful purpose could be served by going into the merits of the controversy raised in the writ petition. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, a direction deserves to issue for ordering regularisation of the admission of the petitioner to the said course which was granted and results thereof declared under the interim orders of this Court. Consequently, the admission of the petitioner to the course in question is regularised and the writ petition is disposed of these terms. No order as to costs.;