JUDGMENT Vineet Saran, J.
1. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing of an order dated 13.2.2003 passed by Respondent No. 1 whereby the application of the petitioner for grant of recognition has been rejected. A further prayer has been made for a direction to the respondents to consider the application and grant recognition for High School to the petitioner-institution in accordance with the Rules applicable in 1999.
2. The contention of the petitioner is that it had initially filed an application on 27.1.1998 along with the requisite deposit of Rs. 800/- and late fee of Rs. 300/-. According to the petitioner the said application Remained pending. However, again on 18.1.2003 the petitioner filed another application along with a deposit of Rs. 10,000/- for grant of recognition of High School examination for the year 2005. By means of the impugned order dated 13.2.2003 the said application has been returned back to the petitioner along with Rs. 10,000/- deposited by it.
3. The rules relating to grant of recognition were amended on 24.9.2002 which was duly gazetted. The application of the petitioner for grant of recognition for the year 2005 would be governed by the said Rules and since admittedly the petitioner has not complied with the conditions mentioned in the said rules the order dated 13.2.2003 for grant of recognition for the year 2005 cannot be faulted and hence does not call for interference.
4. As regards the other prayer for a direction to the respondents to consider the application for grant of recognition in accordance with the Rules applicable in 1999, what is to be first considered is as to whether the application of the petitioner-institution for grant of recognition said to have been filed on 27.1.1998 was actually pending consideration before the authority. In para 6 of the counter affidavit it has been categorically stated that no deposit as claimed by the petitioner had ever been made. Neither in the writ petition nor with the rejoinder affidavit has the petitioner filed any receipt of deposit having been made along with the alleged application dated 27.11.1998. In paragraph 5 of the rejoinder affidavit the petitioner has filed a copy of the letter issued by the petitioner-institution itself to show that the deposit had been made. In the absence of the petitioner having filed any receipt issued by the respondent-authorities, it cannot be established that any such application, alleged to have been filed on 27.11.1998, was pending before the respondent-authorities for grant of recognition of the petitioner-institution for conducting High School examination. Thus the second prayer of the petitioner for considering its application for grant of recognition under the Rules applicable in the year 1999 also cannot be granted.
5. For the aforesaid reasons this writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to cost.