ORDER Rama Jois, J.—In this Writ Petition the petitioner has questioned the legality of the decision of the Mysore University cancelling his admission to the L.L.B. Degree course and also to the M.A. Degree Course in History. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follow : The petitioner holds Master's degree in Economics of the Mysore University. He joined a private law College, namely, Saradavilas Law College for the law degree course in the academic year 1982-83. He also sought admission to the M.A. Degree Course in History in the academic year 1983-84, and the same was granted. Subsequently, the University, noticing that the petitioner was pursuing two degree courses simultaneously, issued a notice dated 23-7-1985, calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why his admission to the three year L.L.B. Degree course as also to the M.A. Degree Course in History, should not be cancelled in view of the Regulations, which prohibited the candidates from pursuing the two degree courses simultaneously during the same academic year. The above notice was based on the notification dated 17th August, 1983, (Annexure-K). It reads : "University of Mysore Mysore Viswavidyanilaya Karya Soudha, Crawford Hall, Mysore, Dt: 17-8-1983. No. R2/388/83-84. Notification Sub : Barring students from studying simultaneously more than one course leading to a degree. Pursuant to the resolution of the Academic Council passed at its meeting held on 27/28-5-1983, following regulations are notified for information and guidance of students under the jurisdiction of this University. 1. No student admitted to a degree in a College of Department of Studies under the jurisdiction of this University shall be permitted to study simultaneously in any other course leading to a degree (regular, evening or correspondence) offered by this University. 2. If a candidate gets admitted to more than one course except as provided in Regulation 1 above the University shall cancel without going prior notice his/her admission to both the courses to which he/she has joined. The above Regulations will be effective from the academic year 1983-84." The petitioner submitted his reply and requested the University to save him the benefit of the studies of the two degree courses. The University, however, proceeded to pass the order dated 16th April, 1986 (Annexure-A). Relevant portion of the same reads : "Order No. R/7.Misc./85-86 dt: 16-4-1986. The above Regulations will be effective from the academic year 1983-84." The petitioner submitted his reply and requested the University to save him the benefit of the studies of the two degree courses. The University, however, proceeded to pass the order dated 16th April, 1986 (Annexure-A). Relevant portion of the same reads : "Order No. R/7.Misc./85-86 dt: 16-4-1986. In pursuance of the decision taken by the University Syndicate at its meeting held on 7-3-1986 and as per regulation relating to barring students from studying more than one course simultaneously leading to a degree (Regular, evening or correspondence) the admission of Sri B. Basavaraju, S/o B.C. Boralingegowda, S. Bideri Post, Kadur Taluk, Chickmagalur District (i) to L.L.B. Degree course at Saradavilas Law College, Mysore, and (ii) to M.A. Degree course in History at Manasagangothri, Mysore, is cancelled and his results of both the degree examinations are withdrawn By Order, Sd/- for Registrar" Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has presented this Petition. 3. As could be seen from the show cause notice and the impugned order, the benefit of both the degree courses have been forfeited on the ground that there was contravention of the Regulations published in the Notification dated 17th August, 1983. The contention of the petitioner is that the said provision was not in force at the time when he was admitted to the Law degree Course in the year 1982-83 or at the time when he was admitted to the M.A. Degree Course in History in the year 1983-84. Learned Counsel further submitted that the notification was issued on 17-8-1983 but the petitioner had already been admitted to the M.A. Degree Course, in History on 5-8-1983 itself and therefore his admission to both the degree courses could not be cancelled on the basis of the notification, which had come into existence subsequent to his joining both the courses. 4. Sri V.C. Brahmarayappa, Learned Counsel for the University, submitted that a notification had been issued as early as on 21-2-1980 prescribing the Regulations for the law degree course. 4. Sri V.C. Brahmarayappa, Learned Counsel for the University, submitted that a notification had been issued as early as on 21-2-1980 prescribing the Regulations for the law degree course. Relevant portion of the same reads : "2(a) Candidates pursuing a course of instruction leading to the degree in law, either BGL or LLB of the Mysore University shall not simultaneously pursue a course of study for any other Degree or Diploma or Certificate of this University or Body, provided that this rule shall not apply to those who are already undergoing double courses of study before 1-1-1978 " In view of the above Regulation, Learned Counsel submitted that the petitioner while continuing his studies for the Law degree course, could not have sought admission to the M.A. Degree Course in History. 5. The contention urged for the University on the basis of the above Regulation is only helpful to the Learned Counsel to sustain the decision of the University to the extent the admission of the petitioner was cancelled for the M.A. Degree course, for the reason that as could be seen from the wording of the Regulation, a student who had been admitted to the Law Degree course was prohibited from taking any other degree course simultaneously. The Regulation did not say that if a student were to join any other degree course while pursuing his studies for the Law Degree course, his admission to both the courses should be cancelled. The effect of the above Regulation is that if a student, who is pursuing his Law Degree course, were to join to any other degree course, his admission to such degree course would be illegal and not his earlier admission to the Law Degree course. Therefore, the impugned order to, the extent it cancels the admission of the petitioner to the M.A. Degree course in History, is well founded. 6. As far as the cancellation of the admission of the petitioner to the Law Degree course is concerned, it has been done only on the basis of the notification dated 17th August, 1983. As the said notification was issued subsequent to the admission of the petitioner to the Law degree course, the same could not be enforced against the petitioner. As far as the cancellation of the admission of the petitioner to the Law Degree course is concerned, it has been done only on the basis of the notification dated 17th August, 1983. As the said notification was issued subsequent to the admission of the petitioner to the Law degree course, the same could not be enforced against the petitioner. It is true that the notification was to be effective from the academic year 1983-84, but, long before the issue of the said notification, the petitioner was admitted to the Law Degree course. Therefore, the impugned order to the extent it cancels the admission of the petitioner to the Law Degree course, cannot be sustained. 7. In the result, I make the following order : (i) The writ petition is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned order (Annexure-A), in so far it relates to the cancellation of the admission of the petitioner to the Law Degree course, is set aside. The rest of the order remains undisturbed. (iii) A consequential order shall issue to the respondent to permit the petitioner to pursue his LLB. Degree course