JUDGMENT : R.R.K. Trivedi, J. In this writ petition, counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged and the learned Counsel for the parties agreed that the writ petition may be decided finally at this stage. 2. Facts giving rise to this writ petition are that Dr. Don Dushyanth Samarnayake who is a Sri Lankan National after completing M.B.B.S. Course from Patna Medical College, Patna, Joined Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi for doing M.S. Course in General Surgery which he claims to have completed in December, 1995. On completing of M.S. Course (General Surgery), Petitioner wanted to Join the Course of super specialities. Banaras Hindu University awards degree of D.M. (Doctoratus Medicinus) and M. Ch. (Magister Chirurgise) in certain subjects. Petitioner applied for registration to M. Ch. Course of 1996 in Urology in pursuance of the advertisement filed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. On this application, Petitioner was initially issued an admit card to appear in the Entrance examination which was scheduled to be held on 11th February, 1996. However, by order dated 11th February, 1996 admit card issued in favour of Petitioner was cancelled on the ground that as Petitioner is a foreign national, he does not meet the prescribed conditions as laid down in prospectus for foreign nationals. Aggrieved by the order dated 11th February, 1996 filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition, Petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. 3. In this writ petition, important questions for determination are as to whether Petitioner could make an application for his registration in M. Ch. Course of subject Urology along with other candidates who are Indian Citizens and whether the Petitioner complied with all the formalities required under the Ordinance for being registered to the course of M. Ch. Urology as foreign national. Learned Counsel for the parties, while arguing for their respective sides, placed before me various documents filed along with the writ petition, counter-affidavits, rejoinder-affidavits and supplementary affidavits. However, before dealing with the documents, it is necessary to ascertain essential requirements for a foreign national for being registered in such super specialities Course. 4. Ordinance No. 14 of the General Ordinance deals with the foreign national. Ordinance No. 14 is reproduced below: 14. However, before dealing with the documents, it is necessary to ascertain essential requirements for a foreign national for being registered in such super specialities Course. 4. Ordinance No. 14 of the General Ordinance deals with the foreign national. Ordinance No. 14 is reproduced below: 14. (a) Foreign national and other candidates nominated by the Government of India for admission against reserved (seats/ supernumerary seats under various scholarship' schemes may be admitted if they fulfil the prescribed minimum eligibility requirements. (b) (i) Self-supporting foreign nationals recommended by the Government of India/Embassies or who apply directly for admission may be admitted against open seats on merit basis, except in these courses to which admissions are made through University Entrance Test. The admission of students who apply directly shall be in accordance with the rules in force and subject to the clearance of the Government of India, if so required. (ii) They should have adequate knowledge of English and/or Hindi as per requirement of the course and also fulfil the minimum eligibility requirement prescribed for the course. 5. For perusal of the Ordinance No. 14 (a) and (b) of the Ordinance, it is clear that there could be two categories of candidates of foreign nationals. The first category of candidate is that who are nominated by the Government of India for admission against reserved seats/ supernumerary seats under various scholarship schemes. Such candidates may be admitted if they fulfil the prescribed minimum eligibility requirements. The second category is of self-supporting foreign nationals recommended by the Government of India/ Embassies who applied directly for admission may be admitted against open seats on merit basis. Such candidates cannot apply for those courses to which admissions are made through Entrance Test. The admission of candidates who applied directly shall be in accordance with the rules in force and subject to the clearance of the Government of India, If so required. It is not the claim of Petitioner that he was nominated for admission by the Government of India against any reserved seat or supernumerary seat under any scholarship scheme on strength of which he should be admitted to the course. It is pertinent to mention here that the Petitioner vide his letter dated 27th December, 1995 made to His Excellency. It is not the claim of Petitioner that he was nominated for admission by the Government of India against any reserved seat or supernumerary seat under any scholarship scheme on strength of which he should be admitted to the course. It is pertinent to mention here that the Petitioner vide his letter dated 27th December, 1995 made to His Excellency. The High Commissioner of Sri Lanka prayed that the recommendation may be made to the Indian Council for Cultural Relations for Scholarship to Petitioner for a period of two years for doing M. Ch. Urology course. However, there is no evidence on record to show that any such scholarship was granted to Petitioner. 6. Thus the Petitioner could only be a candidate of second category of self-supporting foreign nationals having applied directly for admission against open seats on merit basis. This right is confined to only those seats where the University does not hold entrance test. It could not be denied that for registering candidates to the courses of M. Ch. Urology, entrance test was held. Thus the Petitioner was not eligible to appear as a direct candidate under clause 14 (b) (i) of the Ordinance. The application of the Petitioner submitted directly for admission then can be dealt with in accordance with rules in force. Such rules are provided in Special Ordinance relevant extract whereof has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. Ordinance No. 3 of Special Ordinance provided for registration in such courses. Clauses (a), (b) and (c) deal with general candidates and are not applicable to Petitioner. Clause (d) of Ordinance No. 3 is relevant in the present case which is being reproduced below: (d) The sponsored/deputed or foreign students will be treated as supernumerary candidates. 1. Sponsorship of only those candidates shall be considered who are in service of any Government or Statutory Body. 2. Research Fellowships of Government Research Organisation e.g. 1.C.M.R./C.D.R.I., C.S.I.R., etc., shall also be considered for registration. 3. Application of all foreign students shall have to be routed through the concerned Ministry of Government of India. 7. In the present case, the Petitioner does not claim to be sponsored candidate nor he claims registration on basis of any research fellowship granted in his favour for doing M. Ch. Course in Urology. Petitioner has claimed that he directly applied as a foreign national for being registered to the course. 7. In the present case, the Petitioner does not claim to be sponsored candidate nor he claims registration on basis of any research fellowship granted in his favour for doing M. Ch. Course in Urology. Petitioner has claimed that he directly applied as a foreign national for being registered to the course. There is serious dispute between the parties as to whether the application of the Petitioner was routed through the concerned Ministry of Government of India as required under Sub-clause (3) of Clause (d) of Ordinance No. 3. 8. Learned Counsel for both the sides have relied on the documents filed along with writ petition, counter-affidavit, rejoinder-affidavit and supplementary affidavits. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the application submitted by Petitioner complied with the requirements of aforesaid Sub-clause (3) and it was properly routed through the concerned Ministry of Government of India. The submission of the learned Counsel for the Respondents, on the other hand, is that the application was filed in the office of the Director, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University and it was not routed through the concerned Ministry of Government of India as required under Sub-clause (3) and the application has rightly been rejected by the Respondents University. 9. For determining the question whether the application was routed through the concerned Ministry as required under the Ordinance, it is necessary to peruse the documents filed by Petitioner. The important document is Annexure 1 to the rejoinder-affidavit which is application dated 27th December. 1995. written to His Excellency the High Commissioner or Sri Lanka. From perusal of this application, it does not appear that the application form as required under the advertisement, Annexure 2 to the writ petition, with necessary forms was filed before the Embassy. It was a simple application stating certain facts which was forwarded to the Ministry of External Affairs same day. in this application, the High Commissioner recommended and endorsed the application and requested that no objection may be issued in favour of the applicant. The letter is Annexure 2 to the Rejoinder-Affidavit. The third letter is dated 6th February, 1996 addressed to the Vice-Chancellor, Banaras Hindu University recommending for favourable consideration of the application of the Petitioner. A Joint reading of these three documents leaves no doubt that the application form for registration to the Courses of M. Ch. Urology was not actually routed through the concerned Ministry. The third letter is dated 6th February, 1996 addressed to the Vice-Chancellor, Banaras Hindu University recommending for favourable consideration of the application of the Petitioner. A Joint reading of these three documents leaves no doubt that the application form for registration to the Courses of M. Ch. Urology was not actually routed through the concerned Ministry. The application form was directly filed in the office of the Director, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University and the letter dated 6th February, 1996 only recommended for favourable consideration. That can be hardly termed as compliance of the Sub-clause (3) of Clause (d) of Ordinance No. 3 mentioned above. The Petitioner was not a stranger to the procedure. He has himself admitted in the writ petition that he pursued his studies of M.B.B.S. Course and M. S. (General Surgery) Course as sponsored candidate. He was well aware of the procedure. in fact, the application should have been filed in the concerned Embassy with requisite papers. It cannot be denied that the Petitioner's stay in this country is regulated by law. His entry, stay and exit from the country is duly notified and regulated under the provisions of Foreigners Act, 1946. He cannot claim admission to the super speciality Courses as a matter of right like other candidates who are Indian Citizen. Petitioner could only be allowed registration to such course on his application being submitted before the appropriate authority and routed through concerned Ministry. The admissions to such courses entail financial liability on the University. The candidates registered under the courses are paid certain amounts as clear from the advertisement, Annexure 2 to the writ petition. Paragraph No. 7 of the advertisement clearly shows that the sponsored/deputed applicants will be treated as supernumerary candidates and in case of their selection and registration/admission and Joining for the course, they will not get any payment from the institute/University. The requirement of the Sub-clause (3) that the application should be routed through concerned Ministry, is not by way of casual formality. It is for purposes of scrutiny by the concerned Ministry about all the aspects of the matter including finances and legal stay for the period of the course in this country. in my opinion, the Petitioner has miserably failed to establish that this procedure was actually complied with. It is for purposes of scrutiny by the concerned Ministry about all the aspects of the matter including finances and legal stay for the period of the course in this country. in my opinion, the Petitioner has miserably failed to establish that this procedure was actually complied with. Reference has also been made to the letters filed as Annexures 1 and 2 to the counter-affidavit. However, they do not make any improvement in this respect. By letter Annexure 1 to the counter-affidavit, some inquiry was made about reservation for foreign students in M. Ch. Course in subject Urology, which was replied. Learned Counsel placed strong reliance on the letter dated 10th January, 1996 filed as Annexure 1 to the supplementary affidavit. However, from this letter also, it is not established that the application form of the Petitioner was routed through the concerned Ministry. It appears that by this letter no objection was indicated in context with the application dated 27th December, 1995 filed before the High Commissioner. 10. In the circumstances mentioned above, Petitioner has failed to make out any case for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. However, from the special ordinance, it appears that the candidates are registered twice in a year ordinarily in the months of February and August. If Petitioner is still keen to Join the course, he may apply for any future course in accordance with the provisions contained in the Ordinance and the observations made above. The impugned order and this order rejecting the writ petition shall not come in way of Petitioner if he otherwise satisfies other requirements in this regard. 11. Subject to aforesaid observations, the writ petition is rejected. There will be, however, no order as to costs.