1. These appeals are being decided by this common Judgment/order. The appellants are hereby impugning the order which has been passed by learned Single Judge of this Court on 17.1.2000 whereby learned Judge dismissed the Writ Petitions filed by these appellants.

2. The appellants are taking the exception to the judgment and order passed by learned Single Judge on brief grounds like non-consideration of the relevant provisions around which the admissions of the students revolved. It has been also contended that learned Single Judge committed the error in interpreting the relevant Rules made for admitting the students to the 1st year of B.E./B.Arch. The exception has also been taken to the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge by criticising it on the ground that learned Judge has not considered that there has been infringement of the fundamental rights of the appellants so far as Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution is concerned.

3. Appellants Ku. Varsha Shrivastava, Madhur Agarwal and Soumi Chatterjee had appeared for PET examination. They secured marks above 33% in PET Examination. In view of that, they claimed that they should have been admitted in 1st year of B .E. course and that too in Govindram Seksaria Institute of Technology and Science, Indore (hereinafter referred to as 'Institution' for convenience). In the alternative, it was contended that they should have been admitted in other parallel institutions.

4. The main grievance of the appellants seem to be that putting aside their claims for admission, some other students who are interveners in these appeals have been granted admission to the said course and that too in the Institution.

5. Briefly it has to be mentioned that the counselling was conducted in four phases, last phase of the counselling commenced from 21.10.99 and closed on 24.10.99. All these appellants did appear for the said counselling. In that 4th phase of counselling, the interveners got the opportunity of getting the admissions and that is the grievance of the appellants.

6. It will have to he mentioned here that father of KU. Varsha Shrivastava is a professor in the S.G.S.I.T.S. Institute. He wrote a letter to chairman, PET Counselling Directorate of Tech. Education, Bhopal on 28.8.99 in respect of the counselling of his daughter Ku. Varsha Shrivastava (one of the appellants). Thereafter Dr. R.K. Shrivastava, Professor CE-AMD, SGSITS, Indore, wrote another letter to Shri AV. Singh, Principal Secretary, Manpower Planning Deptt. Govt. of M.P. Bhopal on 21.9.99. That letter bears a title "My telephonic talk with you on 21.9.99 at about 7.30 P.M." which has been underlined. A request has been made to Principal Secretary, Manpower Planning Deptt. of State of M.P. at Bhopal that a seat be reserved for his daughter Ku. Varsha who was having Roll No. 306948 in the said examination and secured 352, marks out of 900, marks. Again a letter was written by the same person on 30.9.99 to Dr. Y.K. Sharma, Director, Directorate of Tech. Education Satpura Bhavan, Bhopal. The subject was the same. Again, a letter was written by him to Dr. P.c. Sharma on 1.10.99. Thereafter Annexure P/10 will have to be considered and that is communication made to counselling Incharge Director, Tech. Education, Satpura Bhavan, Bhopal and that is from Dr. Basant Shrivastava, who happens to he the grand-father of Ku. Varsha. That letter has been annexed with a guidance given to counselling Incharge, instructing him as to how counselling is to done. It speaks of itself. No further comments from this Court.

7. Soumi Chatterjee got the admission in Shri Vaishnava Institute of Technology and Science, Indore, besides her choice. She is claiming the admission in the institute, respondent No.3 and alternatively other institutions.

8. The interveners strongly objected to the maintainability of this appeal. Therefore, and in The interest of the community of students at large and protecting their future, this appeal is bei