DEEPAK VERMA, J. ( 1 ) HEARD Shri C. B. Patne learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. The case has a chequered history. The petitioner is a registered Society under the M. P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973, The petitioner had started imparting instructions to students for B Ed examination. It is alleged that the name of the College is Jagrati Shiksha Mahavidyalaya, Neemuch. The said College is controlled by respondent No. 1 University and is affiliated to it for the purposes of examination. In the year 1991, 158 candidates had been enrolled by the said Society for B. Ed examination. ( 2 ) THESE students were not allowed to appear in the B. Ed. examination conducted by the respondent University which compelled the petitioner to file petition in this High Court which was numbered as M. P. 436 of 91. In the said petition an interim order was passed on 22-3-1991 and it was directed that the students of the petitioner's Society shall be allowed to fill in the forms for appearing at the ensuing B. Ed. examination and their forms shall be entertained within a period of 10 days from the date of the said order subject to the Rules of eligibility piescribed by the University and subject to the result of the said petition. On account of this order, 158 students of the petitioner Society appeared at the, Theory Examination which had commenced on 11-4-91 and continued upto 29-4-1991. ( 3 ) THE contention of the petitioner is that all the 158 students had participated in the said B. Ed. examination. Thereafter, the respondent university applied for vacating of the stay order passed in the aforesaid petition on 23-3-91. By order dated 10-8-1991 the said stay order was vacated. Being aggrieved by this order dated 10-8-1991 the petitioner filed a Special leave Petition in the Supreme Court Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in case the petitioner succeeds, then the students may be permitted to undertake practical examination as required under the Rules and the results may be published according to Rules. Due to strike of Advocates petitioner's counsel could not appear. However, the petitioner's Secretary himself appeared before this Hon'ble Court on 13-12-1991 and argued the matter. But the said Misc. petition was dismissed on 13-12-1991. Due to strike of Advocates petitioner's counsel could not appear. However, the petitioner's Secretary himself appeared before this Hon'ble Court on 13-12-1991 and argued the matter. But the said Misc. petition was dismissed on 13-12-1991. ( 4 ) ONCE again being aggrieved by the said order the petitioner filed another S. L. P. in the Supreme Court. In this an order was passed on 22-1-92 to the effect that the petitioner would be at liberty to apply for recognition of the College afresh and it may be considered on its merits by the concerned Authorities. Since there were some errors in the said order, the petitioner filed a review petition in which an order was passed by the Supreme Court on 14-5-1992. The earlier order of the Supreme court was modified and it was directed that the petitioner will be at liberty to apply for permission to established the College and it may be considered on its merits by the concerned Authorities, As regards practical examination hon'ble Supreme Court observed that it will be open to the petitioner to make appropriate application cither itself or through the candidates to the university which may consider such request sympathetically. ( 5 ) ON account of non-compliance of the order of the Supreme Court dated 14-5-1992, the petitioner had filed a contempt petition bearing No. MCC 406 of 92 before this Court. That petition was also dismissed. The petitioner filed yet another appeal before the Supreme Court which was disposed of by order dated 15-3-1993 with the direction that it is open to the petitioner to approach the concerned Authorities and get the necessary orders in the pending matters. ( 6 ) THE contention of the petitioner is that thereafter it has submitted representations to respondents nos. 1 and 2 to permit it to hold the practical examination of 158 B. Ed. students. The said representations have been submitted on 8-7-92, 7-8-92, 21-5-92 and 16-8-93. Another representation by the petitioner was also submitted to Hon'ble Minister for Higher Education on 17-3-1994 and copy of the same was marked to respondent nos. 1 and 2 also. It is further submitted that the respondent no. 3 State had issued a letter to respondent no. 2 on 22-4-1994 requesting him to conduct the B. Ed. practical examination of the students of the petitioner Society. 1 and 2 also. It is further submitted that the respondent no. 3 State had issued a letter to respondent no. 2 on 22-4-1994 requesting him to conduct the B. Ed. practical examination of the students of the petitioner Society. The contention of the petitioner is that the students are becoming over age for employment if practical examination is not conducted immediately. The petitioner has filed this petition for the relief that respondent nos. 1 and 2 should be directed to hold and conduct B. Ed. examination (practical) of 158 students of the petitioner Society and to declare their results. ( 7 ) I have perused the various orders passed by this High Court as well as by the Hon'ble Apex Court. On 14-5-92 as well as on 15-3-1993 the Apex Court had directed the petitioner to approach the concerned authorities and to get the necessary order passed in the pending matters. Pursuant to the said orders passed by the Apex Court the petitioner has alread made representations which have not been decided so far. Consequently at this stage there is no justification to admit the petition and to keep the same pending. However, it is directed that the petitioner's resprcsentations shall be decided by the repondents nos. 1 and 2 within a period of 2 (two)months from to day. The said representations shall be decided keeping in mind the orders passed by the Apex Court. The result of the said representations shall be communicated to the petitioner immediately. In case any adverse order is passed against the petitioner, then the petitioner shall be at liberty ta approach the proper froum for agitating the same. With the above observations the petitions stands disposal of finally without notice to the other side. Order accordingly .