JUDGMENT R.A. Sharma, J. - Smt. Asha Kumari, Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 17579 of 1987, who was selected for trzining of B.T.C. course was not given admission in Rajkiya Kanya Diksha Vidyalaya, Tehri (hereinafter referred to as the college) on the ground of pregnancy. She, as such, made a representation before the D. I. O. S., who directed the Principal of the College to grant her the admission and in pursuance of these directions she was granted admission in the college ; but subsequently her admission was cancelled vide orders dated 25-9-1987 and 6-10-1987, passed by the D. I. O. S. and the Principal of the college respectively. It is against these orders that she has filed this writ petition before this Court and the court granted an interim order, whereby a vacancy in the B. T. C. Course in the college was reserved for her. 2. Km. Gita Nautiyal, Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 22125 of 1987 was at serial No. 1 of the waiting list of the B. T. C. course in the same college and when admission of Smt. Asha Kumari was cancelled, she was granted the admission against that vacancy. When Smt. Asha Knmari filed a writ petition and obtained stay order, Principal of the college on 14-11-1987 cancelled the admission of Km. Gita Nautiyal and she also filed this writ petition against the cancellation of her admission. In this writ petition also an interim order has been passed by this Court, whereby she has also been directed to attend the B. T. C. classes provisionally and to fill examination form. 3. On account of the interim orders, passed by this Court both Smt. Asha Kumari and Km. Gita Nautiyal had appeared in B. T. C. Examination and according to the affidavits filed by both these petitioners in support of their respective application, they have passed the B. T. C. examination from the college during the pendency of their writ petitions in this Court. Both these petitioners have requested this Court for direction for declaration of their results and issuance of marks sheet and necessary certificates. 4. The only ground on which the admission of Smt. Asha Kumari was cancelled, was that she was pregnant at that time. Both these petitioners have requested this Court for direction for declaration of their results and issuance of marks sheet and necessary certificates. 4. The only ground on which the admission of Smt. Asha Kumari was cancelled, was that she was pregnant at that time. Learned counsel for Smt. Asha Kumari has vehemently argued that Government Order and the order of the Principal prohibiting the admission of pregnant woman in B. T. C. course is ultra vires and is liable to be quashed. It is, however, not necessary to go into this controversy inasmuch as during the pendency of their writ petitions, both the petitioners have passed B. T. C. Examination. A Division Bench of this Court in Vijai Pal Singh Negi v. Vice-Chancellor (1987 UPLBEC 127) has laid down that if during the pendency of the writ petition the petitioners have passed the examination, it is futile exercise to go into the question as to whether the admission was wrongly cancelled or not, and the only realistic view is to direct the authorities concerned to declare the result of the petitioners. Another Division Bench in the case of Dr. Anil Kumar Agarwal v. Director of Medical Education (1987 UPLBEC 547) has also taken the some view on humanitari an ground in accordance with the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to therein. 5. For the reasons given above, the result of Smt. Asha Kumari is liable to be declared by the respondents. As Km. Gita Nautiyal has also appeared in the same examination and claims to have passed, it is fit and proper that her result should also be declared otherwise she will suffer irreparably. 6. Both the writ petitions are accordingly allowed and the impugned orders, cancelling their admissions in the B. T. C. course in Rajkiya Kanya Diksha Vidyalaya, Tehri, are quashed. The respondents are further directed to declare their results forthwith and issue necessary marks sheet and certificates. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no orders as to costs.