TIBREWAL, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking mandamus against the respondents to provide him admission in 1st year LL. B. THEre is no dispute that the petitioner had passed his Graduation in Commerce in the year 1987 from the University of Rajasthan and he had obtained 852 marks out of 1700. Thus, he had secured more than 50% of the marks. He was declined admission in LL. B. 1st year by respondent No. 2. Though, in the petition, the petitioner has stated that some of the candidates who had secured less marks were given admission in 1st year LL. B. after giving them the benefit of 5% weightage marks, while the petitioner has not been given 5% weightage marks by the respondent No. 2. However, I need not examine this fact in details, as the respondent No. 2 in its reply, has pleaded inter alia that the petitioner was denied admission as the admission form submitted by him, was incomplete. THE only defect which has been pointed out in the reply is that the petitioner had not submitted original marksheet, original TC and Gap Certificate. THE respondents have also pleaded that the petitioner was not given admission, as at the time of scrutiny of the admission form, it was found that the essential original documents were not filed along with the application, and on this ground, the petitioner's name was not included in the list of the successful candidates, who were given admission. It was also stated that a list of incomplete forms was displayed on the Notice Board of the College on Dec. 3, 1991, & the petitioner's name was included in that list and the candidates were given three days time to submit the requisite documents, but, the petitioner failed to do so. Hence, he was not given admission and his name was not included in the admission list.
(2.) IN rejoinder to the reply, the petitioner submitted that the condition No. 27 is not statutory one and that he had submitted the photostat copies duly attested of all the necessary documents along with the admission form. It was further stated that in the prospectus of University of Rajasthan, Jaipur 1991- 92, General Rules for new admissions applicable to all colleges have been stated. Condition No. 3, which is relevant presently is reproduced as under: - "at the time of submitting his application form, the applicant must furnish attested copies of all documents i. e. , marks-sheets, certificates and Transfer Certificate from the INstitution last attended by him/her. The original should be produced for verification at the time of admission. Un-attested Photostat copies of Certificates and marks-sheets, etc. shall not be accepted. " The learned counsel has also drew my attention to the prospectus issued by respondent No. 2 for the Sessions 1991-92. For admission in 1st year LL. B. classes, the requisite condition is that the candidate should have a Bachelors' degree or other degrees referred in the said prospectus with a minimum 45% marks. Condition No. 3 further provides that a candidate who is resident of Rajasthan will get weightage of 5% while preparing merit list. The learned counsel also drew my attention to Ordinance No. 252, which also provides 45% marks in the aggregate of the qualifying examination for admission to 1st Year LL. B. (Three years course ). No concession of any ground whatsoever is admissible in the said rule. I have given my careful consideration, to the above submission. The learned Dy. Govt. Advocate has categorically made a statement before this Court that the admission to the petitioner in LL. B. 1st year class, was denied only on the ground that he did not furnish original copy of the mark sheet along with the admission form. It is not disputed before me that the petitioner had submitted photostat attested copy of the mark sheet along with the admission form. It is also not disputed that the petitioner was eligible to get the admission in 1st year LL. B. class as he had secured more than 45% marks in the qualifying examination. Therefore, the only controversy remains as to whether the denial of admission to the petitioner on the ground that he did not submit the original marksheet along with admission form was justified. I have stated earlier that in the prospectus issued by respondent No. 2, it is not a condition that the original marksheet should be filed by a candidate along with the admission form. Even General Rules for admissions applicable to all courses, notified by University of Rajasthan in its prospectus 1991-92 do not make such a condition. On the contrary, the condition is that the original marksheet/certificate or transfer certificate should be produced for verification at the time of admission. This appears to be reasonable also because a candidate has to apply for getting admission at various places in this age of competition. Therefore, if he produces the original marksheet or other documents, then it may create a problem for making application in other institutions for getting the admission. When the petitioner had submitted the photostat copy which was duly attested, the authorities concerned should not have insisted the production of the original marksheet or other documents along with the admission form. The time given by the respondents was hardly a reasonable time. No such condition was notified by the respondent No. 2 in its prospectus issued for the session 1991-92 that those application forms shall not be considered if the original documents are not submitted along with it. The authorities should have taken a reasonable and practical approach and it should not have taken such a strict view in denying admission to the petitioner, who otherwise, was eligible to get the same simply on the ground that original marksheet and other original documents were not submitted along with the admission form even though the photostat copies duly attested were submitted by the petitioner. The view taken by the non-petitioner No. 2 is wholly unreasonable and arbitrary. It is also note worthy that the petitioner had submitted all the requisite original documents to the respondent No. 2 on 20. 12. 91. Consequently, this writ petition deserves to be allowed, and it is hereby allowed, and the respondent No. 2 is directed to provide admission to the petitioner in LL. B. 1st Year class forthwith. No order as to costs. .;