JUDGMENT

DUTT, J. :— Special leave is granted. Heard learned Counsel for both parties.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court whereby the High Court dismissed the writ petition of the appellant challenging the order of the Dean of the Faculty of Engineering of the Jodhpur University, putting in abeyance the admission of the appellant in the B.E. Degree Course till further orders.

3. The appellant is a diploma-holder and is serving in the M.S.M. Engineering College (Faculty of Engineering), Jodhpur, since 1976 as an Administrator/Instructor. In May, 1987, the appellant submitted an application to the Study Leave Committee of the University of Jodhpur for study leave for three years enabling the appellant to prosecute his studies in the B.E. Degree Course. On Aug. 3, 1977, the Study Leave Committee recommended the case of the appellant for the grant of study leave and on Aug. 14, 1987 the Syndicate of the University accepted the said recommendation and granted study leave to the appellant for a period of three years with full pay. Pursuant to the leave granted to the appellant, he made an application on Nov. 14, 1987 for admission in the B.E. Degree Course.

4. At this stage, it will be pertinent to refer to a resolution dated Sept. 21, 1970 passed by the Faculty of Engineering recommending that the teachers of the University should be granted leave so as to enable them to join the B.E. Degree Course as a regular candidate on a full time basis. The said resolution was accepted by the Acadamic Council of the University on March 25, 1970 and the Syndicate in its turn approved the resolution of the Academic Council.

5. According to the appellant, the above resolution of the Syndicate was acted upon and, as a matter of fact, certain teachers of the University were admitted to B.E. Degree Course. In his application dated Nov. 14, 1987, the appellant specifically mentioned the names of seven teacher-candidates who had been admitted to the various Departments of the Engineering College in pursuance of the above resolution of the Syndicate and the policy of the University. The case of the appellant is that it is the practice of the University of give admission to teachers by creating extra seats in addition to general seats.

6. The appellant made the application for admission after he had been communicated with the resolution of the Syndicate granting leave on the recommendation of the Study Leave Committee. Admittedly, the application was made on Nov. 14, 1987 after the last date for admission in the general seats had expired. According to the appellants, he was communicated with the decision of the Syndicate granting study leave to him on Oct. 29, 1987 and soon thereafter he made the application for admission. It is the case of the appellant that in view of the practice of the University, as the teachers who are granted study leave are admitted by the creation of extra seats, the question of making applications after the last date for admission in the general seats is irrelevant.

7. Be that as it may, the application of the appellant was forwarded by the Professor and Head of the Mechanical and Engineering Department and the Dean, Faculty of Engineering, to the Vice-Chancellor. The Vice-Chancellor referred the application back to the Dean observing that the Dean was competent to make admissions. Certain objections were raised by the Officer-in-Charge, Admissions, including the objection that the appellant had obtained less than 60 per cent marks in the Diploma Examination passed by him. The Dean considered the said objections and recommended the case of the appellant for admission to the Vice-Chancellor with the following observation :-

"However, there is another aspect of this case which deserves consideration. The University has in the past, allowed the teacher candidates of this faculty, securing less than 60 per cent marks in their Diploma Examinations, admission to B.E. Course. This was perhaps to enc