JUDGMENT D. K. Seth, J.
1. The petitioners admission from has been rejected on the ground that though the petitioners had obtained more than 40% but less than 45% marks in the qualifying examination for being admitted in LLB course. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that circular contained in Annexure-2 does not apply in case of the petitioners since they are seeking admission for the course for the session 1996-97 and the said circular would be applicable for the session 1998-99. Therefore, since the petitioners have obtained more than 40% marks, their admission cannot be refused.
2. Mr. Ashok Bhushan, learned counsel for the respondents points out that the said circular does not provide that it is to be effected from the 1998-99 session. In the absence of any specific provision. It would be applied when the admission is being effected after April 1998, i.e.. from the date of issue of the said circular which is dated 21.4.1998.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. I have perused the said circular dated 21.4.1998 contained in Annexure 2 to the writ petition which provides as follows :
"If there is entrance test, the percentage should be 40 but if there is no entrance test, the percentage should be 45 for LLB admission."
5. A plain reading of the said circular does not show that It is intended to be applied from the prospective session 1998-99. On the other hand, the norms has to be followed for the admission in three years and five years law course. In the absence of any specific provision contained, it cannot be said that it would not b applied even in case of admission to the session 1996-97 which is being undertaken after 21.4.1998. The plain reading of the said circular indicates tt is to be applied in respect of three years as well as five years law courses after 21.4.1998 irrespective of the session for which the admission is being made. The said circular specifically provides that in case the admission is through entrance test, in that event the minimum qualifying marks should be 40% for appearing in such entrance test. Whereas if the admission is without entrance test, in that event the percentage would be 45% for admission. In the present case the second clause will apply since the admission is without entrance text.
6. In that view of the matter, there is no substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The writ petition fails and Is accordingly dismissed.
7. However, there will be nor order as to cost.