JUDGMENT 1. Through the instant petition Doctor Vijai Kumar Shukla has sought admission in King George Medical College, Lucknow to the course prescribed for Diploma ie Child Health for the Session 198 86. 2. It appears that the petitioner as well as Opposite Party No. 4 Dr. Pancham Singh sought admission to the said Course. According to the averments made in the writ petition the petitioner's first choice was in respect of Diploma in Child Health and his last choice was for M.D. (Pathology). Instead of the petitioner, Doctor Pancham Singh had been admitted to the Diploma course. In paragraph 1 the petitioner has mentioned that his merit index at M.B.B.S. examination was 58.9% while that of Pancham Singh it was below 52%. The averment of percentage regarding Doctor Pancham Singh has been made in Paragraph 7 of the Writ Petition. The petitioner's plea is that being higher in merit he was entitled to be admitted in preference to Doctor Pancham Singh. Further case of the petitioner is that under the relevant Government Order dated 151282, AnnexureI, Doctor Pancham Singh was not even eligible to be admitted as his merit index at M.B.B.S. examination was below 52% and candidates having merit index of below 52% were debarred from being admitted. Although copy of this petition was served upon learned counsel for the State as far back as on 3rd September, 1985 he has not filed any counter affidavit so far. The case was adjourned on serveral occasions. Today when the case was taken up, learned counsel for the State stated that a representative of the Department had come with the records and the records would be produced before the court. The hearing was deferred for 10 minutes and now more than 10 minutes have elapsed, but the representative of the government has not appeared. In the circumstances, petitioner's averment that his merit was higher than that of Doctor Pancham Singh stands unrebutted. Learned counsel for the State has not been able to show any valid reason for admitting Doctor Pancham Singh in preference to the petitioner. In the circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to be admitted to the Course in question. 3. Apart from claiming a writ of mandamus to command the Opposite party Nos. I to3 to adroit the petitioner to the course in question, the petitioner has also prayed for quashing the admission of Doctor Pancham Singh. In the circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to be admitted to the Course in question. 3. Apart from claiming a writ of mandamus to command the Opposite party Nos. I to3 to adroit the petitioner to the course in question, the petitioner has also prayed for quashing the admission of Doctor Pancham Singh. The petitioner is primarily interested in his own admission. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to disturb the admission already granted to Doctor Pancham Singh. 4. In view of the above,, the petition is allowed and a writ of mandamus is issued commanding, Opposite parties No. I toS to admit Doctor Vijai Kumar Shukla, the petitioner, to D.C.H, Course in King George Medical College Lucknow within two weeks of his complying with the formalities, if any. The petitioner will be entitled to hi cost from Opposite parties No. I to3. In the memorandum of cost the fee of the petitioner's counsel shall be taxed as Rs. 200 if certificate of fee to that extent is available on record. 5. Certified copy of this order shall be supplied to the petitioner or his Counsel within four days on payment of requisite charges. (Petition allowed)