Prakash Tatia, J.-Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner appeared in Rajasthan Pre-Medical Test (RPMT) for the year 2002. A notice was issued by the respondent No. 2 calling upon the students who secured 742 to 708 marks to appear for counselling on 29.2002. According to the petitioner, because of heading in bold letters given in the newspaper some confusion was created and due to that reason, the petitioner could not appear for counselling on 24.09.2002. When the petitioner came to know that the students who have secured marks from 648 to 707 have been called for counselling on 24.09.2002, he submitted a representation on 010.2002 for considering his candidature for counselling which was going to be held on 010.2002. The respondent No. 2 declined to consider the case of the petitioner on the ground that he did not appear in the counselling on 25.09.2002. The process of counselling continued even thereafter and a notice was issued for counselling on 010.2002.

3. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is meritorious and he was eligible for admission on the basis of his marks which he secured in RPMT. The petitioner sub