JUDGMENT Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J.—In this writ petition the petitioner claims for the following reliefs: (i) That a writ in the nature of certiorari be issued for quashing the admissions granted to respondents No. 7 and 8 by way of nomination by respondents No. 1 and 2; (ii) that a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued to the respondents No. 1 and 2 to admit the petitioner by way of nomination against sports category commencing from the Session 1998-99; (iii) that the writ in the nature of certiorari be also issued to quash the decision of the Admission Committee to consider the case of respondent No. 9 against sports category and any further decision pursuant thereto including admission granted to him; (iv) that respondent No. 5 be directed to admit the petitioner to First Year Course against the sports category; (v) that respondents No. 1,2,3,4,5,6 and 10 may be directed to produce the entire record pertaining to admissions by way of nomination made by respondents No. 1 & 2 as well as of considering the case of respondent No.9 by respondent No. 5; (vi) that an inquiry may be directed to be instituted against the Admission Committee constituted by respondents 1 to 3 and 5 for indulging in acts of favouritism on extraneous considerations; (vi) that any other relief deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents. 2. The short facts necessary for understanding the issue raised in this writ petition are as follows:— "The Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur (An Autonomous College of H.P. University) had issued Information Brochure and Application Form for Combined Pre-Entrance Test (CPET), 1998 for seeking admission to First Year of Bachelor of Engineering/ Technology/Architecture in(A) Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur (H.P.) (B) NTT, Colleger of Engineeing, Kala Amb(H.P) and (C) Himachal Pradesh Quota seats in various Regional and other Engineering Colleges in the Country allotted by Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, New Delhi, through nomination by Himachal Pradesh Government." 3. The advertisements were made in various Dailies during the week of July, 1998. The advertisements were made in various Dailies during the week of July, 1998. In Admission Notice published in the English Trihune dated July 17,1998 issued by College of Engineering, Kala Amb (Respondent No. 5) under the authorization of Himachal Pradesh University (respondent No. 4) it was provided that Admissions for all categories, candidates must obtain Prospectus and admission Brochure, available on payment of Rs. 360/- and by post Rs. 400/- from IITT College Campus Counter Kala Amb, District Sirmour, Himachal Pradesh University, Summer Hills, Shimla or 119, Indira Prakash Building, 21 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi or College Faculty House 3096 Sector 21-D, Chandigarh. It was also mentioned that the Bank Draft should be in the name of IITT College of Engineering, Kala Amb. It was also made clear in the advertisement that Application From along with all required documents must reach the office of Deputy Registrar, IITT College of Engineering at Kala Amb latest by 5 p.m. On 22nd July, 1998. The total seats in the College were 140. According to the Admission Brochure of Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur, the last date for receipt of Application Form complete in all respects were required to reach at Regional Engineering college along with fee of Rs. 500 each for general and other categories and Rs. 150/- each for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes categories on or before 4 of the Brochure. For admission to Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur and Himachal Pradesh Quota seats, candidates should have either passed 10+2 standard examination of Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education or its equivalent or appearing in the above said examination in March/April 1998 with Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and English as compulsory subjects. Similar eligibility criteria was also applicable for admission to IITT College of Engineering, Kala Amb as well as for admission to Engineering Colleges other than Regional Engineering Colleges through nomination by Himachal Pradesh Government. The Rules for conduct of CPET examination have been separately dealt with under paragraph 5 of the Information Brochure issued by Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur, respondent No. 3). The criterion for submitting applications have been given in detail in paragraph 6 of the Brochure. The Rules for conduct of CPET examination have been separately dealt with under paragraph 5 of the Information Brochure issued by Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur, respondent No. 3). The criterion for submitting applications have been given in detail in paragraph 6 of the Brochure. The candidates were required to submit separate application forms for seeking admission to respondent No. 3-College and the candidates intended to seek admission to respondent No. 5 College were required to apply separately to the Principal of the College after obtaining Application Form Prospectus from the concerned Principal by the due date as may be notified by the Principal of the College and submit the same to him on the fixed date prescribed in the Prospectus. The candidates who were appearing in CPET to be conducted by the Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur and intended to seek admission in various other Engineering Colleges through nomination by Himachal Pradesh Government were separately and necessarily required to submit the applications to the Director, Technical Education, Vocational and Industrial Training, Himachal Pradesh, Sunder Nagar by the due date as may be notified by the Himachal Pradesh Government and submit the same to him at the appropriate time. It is clearly stipulated in paragraph (vii) in capital letters that candidates were advised to mail the application well in time. The College will neither make any allowance for postal delay nor for any irregularities in submitting the application. The College also does not entertain any correspondence in this regard. 4. The petitioner in this case sent his application form with all enclosures before 15.5.1998. His application was entertained and he was allotted Roll No. by respondent No. 3 College, Hamirpur pursuant to which he appeared in CPET held on 7th June, 1998. The CPET result was declared by respondent No. 3-College on 27th June, 1998 and he had secured 127 marks as per the result card issued to him. The petitioner applied in sports category quota in his application form submitted by him. 5. Paragraph 7 of the Information Brochure deals with the Merit List. It is stipulated in paragraph 7 that 3rd respondent-College, Hamirpur will prepare merit list of candidates on the basis of marks obtained in CPET categorizes as indicated in the Application form of CPET and it will supply the merit list/gazette of result to the Principal, IITT, College of Engineering, Kala Amb and the second respondent-Sundernagar. It is stipulated in paragraph 7 that 3rd respondent-College, Hamirpur will prepare merit list of candidates on the basis of marks obtained in CPET categorizes as indicated in the Application form of CPET and it will supply the merit list/gazette of result to the Principal, IITT, College of Engineering, Kala Amb and the second respondent-Sundernagar. In paragraph 8 of the Brochure, it is specifically stipulated under sub-clause (iv) that "incomplete applications and those received after the prescribed date shall not be entertained under any circumstances." In paragraph 3 of the Prospectus of respondent No. 3-College, it is stipulated that a candidate seeking admission to any of the 17 Engineering Colleges is required to submit only one application. In paragraph 3.6 of this Prospectus it is stipulated that on the basis of CPET merit, the candidates will be called for counselling on the fixed date which will be confined only to those candidates who have been issued call letters to this effect. Respondent No. 1-State had also issued separate Prospectus and Instructions for candidates seeking nomination from Government of Himachal Pradesh for Under-Graduate course in Engineering/ Architecture and Pharmacy against seats allotted by Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India in various Engineering Colleges/ other Technical Institutions in the country for the Session 1998-99. A note has been appended on the Cover Page of the Prospectus that the candidates are advised to study carefully prospectus before applying for nomination. In paragraph 7(a) of the Prospectus it is stipulated that the Himachal Pradesh Government will nominate candidates in Degree in Engineering/Technology/ Architecture on merit on the basis of marks obtained in the CPET conducted by Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur coupled with additional weight age calculated as per criterion laid down in para 17 and shall have to fulfil the minimum academic standard prescribed for admission by the Regional Engineering College (or University) to which he/she is nominated. It is clearly stipulated in note appended to paragraph 10 that if a candidate fails to submit his/her original certificate in case of being failing in merit for nomination, then his/her nomination is liable to be rejected and the next candidate in the merit will be offered nomination in his/her place. In paragraph 10 it is again specifically mentioned that the Application Form should have been accompanied by copies including photocopies of the documents mentioned at serial Nos. 1 to 6. In paragraph 10 it is again specifically mentioned that the Application Form should have been accompanied by copies including photocopies of the documents mentioned at serial Nos. 1 to 6. It is provided in para-11(iv) that in case of candidates seeking admission against Reserved Seats for Scheduled Castes/Scheduied Tribes/Backward Class including OBC/Wards or children of Political Sufferers/Sportsmen etc. they should attach a certificate belonging to the particular category against which the applications were being made, issued by the competent authority. 6. Paragraph 11(x) specifically stipulates that the candidates applying against the Sports Quota should give necessary details regarding sports/ events in which played/participated, supported by duly authenticated sport certificates by Director of Sports5 H.P. Government awarded by the competent authority. It is also stipulated that only such authenticated sports certificates will be taken into account for preparing sports merit which are submitted "along with the application form and additional Sports Certificates or authenticated sports certificates submitted subsequently thereafter will not be considered for preparing the sports merit." 7. In note (viii) appended to para-11, it is provided that a separate application is required to be submitted in case the candidate intends to submit application for more than one category to which he belongs and the applications not submitted for any specified category or having no reference of the category will be considered in general category only. A detailed procedure for seeking nomination against sports quota has been mentioned in para-17 of the Prospectus. The merit of the Sports category is required to be calculated by adding additional weight age in lieu of the grading of the best or the highest sports events played by the candidates as per criterion prescribed to the marks obtained by him/her in the CPET conducted by Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur during the year of admission under reference. As per the Prospectus and instructions for candidates seeking admission from Government of Himachal Pradesh for Under-Graduate courses in Engineering against seats allotted by Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, 3% seats were reserved for sportsmen. Out of 73 total seats allotted for making nominations, thus, there were two seats available for recommending the candidates by way of nomination in the category of sportsmen. 8. The respondent-College Kala Amb also issued separately its Admission Brochure for the Session 1998-99 under the authority of the University of Himachal Pradesh. Out of 73 total seats allotted for making nominations, thus, there were two seats available for recommending the candidates by way of nomination in the category of sportsmen. 8. The respondent-College Kala Amb also issued separately its Admission Brochure for the Session 1998-99 under the authority of the University of Himachal Pradesh. There are three categories of seats for admission i.e. General Seats 50%s Payment Seats 45% and NRI/NRI Sponsored Seats 5%. The criteria for admission for general seats to the extent of 50% is meant for bona fide Himachalies based on the merit list of CPET prepared by H.P. University or Agency nominated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. The last date of receipt of complete Application Forms was 22nd July, 1998 up to 5.00 p.m. at the College Counter. The admission for candidates for Genera category was to be made based on merit list of CPET in Engineering Courses. Paragraph 2 of the Admission Brochure prescribes for admission and reservation of seats categorizes. Out of total 140 seats break-up of reservation percentage has been provided under Clause 2.1.4 and sub-clause (f) thereof Sports category will get 2% seats out of the total seats. The grading system is prescribed under para 2.2.4.2 and there are as many as four Grades i.e. Grade "A", Grade "B", Grade "C" and Grade "D". Para 3.0 of the Admission Brochure deals with certificates and admission fees and it is specifically stipulated in para 3.1 (g) that the Gradation certificate for sportsmen from Director of Sports, concerned is required to be submitted in prescribed pro forma. 9. The petitioner before us has also submitted his application for being considered against 2% seats reserved for sportsmen in the prescribed pro forma before 22.7.1998 to the respondent-Engineering College, Kala Amb. Respondent-Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur issued a notice for Admission Counselling in The Tribune dated July 20, 1998 calling for admission to Degree Courses in various disciplines of Engineering at Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur, other RECs & free seats at NTT College of Engineering, Kala Amb and fixed 27.7.1998 and 28.7.1998 dates for counselling of all the students who had applied for admission to both the Colleges. In note 1 of the Admission Counselling photostat copy of which is placed on record and market as Annexure-PB the students were advised to bring with them original documents as per Prospectus. In note 1 of the Admission Counselling photostat copy of which is placed on record and market as Annexure-PB the students were advised to bring with them original documents as per Prospectus. Fee and original certificates were to be deposited on he spot otherwise no admission will be given. Petitioner has alleged that he made himself available for counselling on 27.7.1998 for being considered against the category of sportsmen for which he had filled neessary prescribed pro forma along with authenticated certificates. He alleged that respondent Km. Shilpa Nayyar had submitted her application for being considered in general category but her case was illegally considered by the Admission Committee on 27.7.1998 against the Sports category. The grievance of the petitioner against respondent No. 7 is that her case should not be considered at all by the Admission Committee against sports category which procedure is against the Prospectus issued by respondent No. 2 Director. The petitioners case was considered by the Committee comprising of Shri Rajinder Singh, Chairman, Registrar Himachal Pradesh University and the Principal of respondent No. 5-College for giving admission in Engineering College, Kala Amb and he was to be given weight age of 25 marks on the basis of Grade B as per the criteria laid down in the Prospectus issued by respondent No. 2 Director. The petitioner alleged that he was not offered seat on 27th July, 1998 but respondent No. 9 Shri Vikas Aery who had not at all applied under the Sports category was granted time to produce the necessary documents and Gradation certificates of sportsmen and the certificate was obtained by him from the Director of Sports to the Government of Himachal Pradesh (respondent No. 6) on 28th July, 1998 after the last date of receipt of the application form after the whole process of counselling by the Selection Committee ended on 27th July, 1998. The petitioner alleged to have lodged protest on 27th July, 1998 to the Chairman of Counselling Committee NTT Kala Amb vide Annexure-PD on 27th July, 1998 itself highlighting the irregularities and illegalities committed by the Committee against the acceptance of fresh applications from various candidates for being considered against the sports category after the prescribed dates. The petitioner alleged to have lodged protest on 27th July, 1998 to the Chairman of Counselling Committee NTT Kala Amb vide Annexure-PD on 27th July, 1998 itself highlighting the irregularities and illegalities committed by the Committee against the acceptance of fresh applications from various candidates for being considered against the sports category after the prescribed dates. The petitioner alleged that the Admission Committee could not grant time to respondent No. 9 to procure the certificate for the purpose of grading since he had not submitted his application complete in all respects either to respondent No. 2 or respondent No. 5-College Kala Amb nor he had mentioned that he was ready and willing to be considered against the sports category. The petitioner also alleged that respondent No. 9 has been unduly favoured by the Counselling Committee in breach of Prospectus issued by Engineering College, Kala Amb and his case could not be considered at all by the Admission/Counselling Committee against the sports category. Thus, the petitioner has challenged the selection of respondents No. 7 and 9 in this writ petition whereas during the pendency of the writ petition name of respondent No. 8 Pankaj Guleria on the request of the petitioner stood deleted vide order dated 6.10.1998. 10. The contesting respondents other than respondent No. 7 Km. Shilpa Nayyar who did not choose to appear after notice of the writ petition filed their separate written statements. A joint reply on the affidavit of Shri M.L Sharma, Director of Technical Education, Vocational and Industrial Training, Himachal Pradesh has been filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2. In preliminary submissions it has been stated that the admission to the sports category was made purely by drawing the merit considering CPET marks plus weightage of the higher sports certificates attached by the candidates concerned. According to the merit list, the petitioner stands at serial No. 5 as there were only two seats in this category as per 100-point roster issued by the Himachal Pradesh Government. Shri Sachin Khajuria who was in the merit list at serial No. 1 securing 177 marks was found absent while called for counselling and thereafter respondent No. 7 Km. According to the merit list, the petitioner stands at serial No. 5 as there were only two seats in this category as per 100-point roster issued by the Himachal Pradesh Government. Shri Sachin Khajuria who was in the merit list at serial No. 1 securing 177 marks was found absent while called for counselling and thereafter respondent No. 7 Km. Shilpa Nayyar who was second in the merit list and secured 165 marks was admitted in Architecture in Goa by nomination and both the seats for sports category were filled up to serial No. 4 of the merit list as candidate at serial No. 3 was also found absent when called for counselling. 11. In the teeth of the specific statement made by the Director, we find that the petitioner has no claim to challenge the admission and nomination of respondent No. 7 Shilpa Nayyar who was found in the merit list above the petitioner and no challenge can be made by the petitioner against her admission/nomination, as it is specifically admitted that her application was considered in sports category. So far the averments made in the writ petition against the selection of respondent No. 9 by respondents No. 3 and 5-Colleges, it is stated in the reply that respondent No. 9 does not stand in the merit list prepared by the Directorate of Technical Education, Vocational and Industrial training Himachal Pradesh for nomination to the Engineering courses. 12. Reply on behalf of Himachal Pradesh University and Selection Committee, respondents 4 and 10 has been jointly filed on the affidavit of Shri Rajinder Singh, Registrar, H.P. University. In this reply, it is submitted that the entrance examination was conducted by Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur who is the competent authority to supply the categorizes merit list/gazette to the Principal of Engineering College, Kala Amb. In reply to paragraph 29, it is stated as under:— "That in reply to this para, the Counselling Committee while interviewing the candidates decided as under:— "The seat against Sports Quota was not filled up as some of the candidates could not bring Gradation Certificate. In reply to paragraph 29, it is stated as under:— "That in reply to this para, the Counselling Committee while interviewing the candidates decided as under:— "The seat against Sports Quota was not filled up as some of the candidates could not bring Gradation Certificate. After deliberations and in order to provide reasonable opportunity to ensure selection on merit, it was unanimously decided that the students be given time up to 4.00 p.m. till 31.7.1998 at IITT College of Engineering, Kala Amb to bring the required gradation certificate and only thereafter the seat of Sports Quota be filled up by the Principal, IITT College of Engineering, Kala Amb out of the students who had already applied for Sports Quota till 27.7.1998. Counselling has been deferred due to above mentioned reasons." 13. In reply to paragraph 31, it is submitted that the applications were received in the respective Institutions a|id they were placed before the Counselling Committee which recommended the admission according to the merit of the candidate on the basis of CPET-1998 and in respect of Sports Category according to the gradation given in the Prospectus of Institution, therefore, the University did not conceal anything while recommending the admission. It is also submitted that everything was done in transparent manner and in accordance with the requirements of law. 14. In his second written statement Shri Rajinder Singh, Registrar, H.P. University and Chairman, Selection Committee in paragraph 29 has stated that the petitioner was given 25 marks as per his gradation certificate issued by respondent-Director of Sports and 50 marks were given to respondent No. 9 as per the gradation certificate issued by the same authority. 14. In his second written statement Shri Rajinder Singh, Registrar, H.P. University and Chairman, Selection Committee in paragraph 29 has stated that the petitioner was given 25 marks as per his gradation certificate issued by respondent-Director of Sports and 50 marks were given to respondent No. 9 as per the gradation certificate issued by the same authority. He has also stated that respondent No. 8 and others had submitted to the Committee on 27.7.1998 that no pro forma for obtaining gradation certificate from the Director of Sports was attached with the Admission Brochure of respondent No. 5-College Kala Amb and only requirement was filing an affidavit, duly sworn and attested by a 1st Class Magistrate as per pro forma 9 on pages 17-18 of the Brochure and their plea was that had the requirement of gradation certificate and pro forma for that purpose been included in the Brochure, they would have brought the same from the Director of Sports, H.P. and Respondent No. 9 had further submitted that he had applied for Kala Amb College and he was not aware of the practice followed in other Institutions. He stated that considering all the aspects of the case the Counselling Committee, after full deliberation had taken a decision and the Committee was fully competent to take a decision in the interest of fair play. He again emphasized that respondent No. 9 was given 50 marks and he had secured 111 marks in the written test. Therefore, his total marks were 161 whereas the petitioner had secured 127 marks in the written test and after adding 25 marks as per his gradation, his total marks went upto 152. He has also stated that neither the petitioner or respondent No. 9 has been given admission as yet because of the pendency of the present writ petition. 15. Reply on behalf of respondent-Regional Engineering College, has been filed by Shri C.L. Sharma Deputy Registrar (Accounts) in which it is admitted that the College conducted the combined CPET on 7.6.1998 and the petitioner had applied for CPET and appeared in it and secured 127 marks. It is, however, stated that the admissions in the Regional Engineering College was given purely on merit basis and the name of the petitioner was not in the merit list. It is, however, stated that the admissions in the Regional Engineering College was given purely on merit basis and the name of the petitioner was not in the merit list. It is submitted that the petitioner is claiming admission against the sportsmen quota seats for which there is no provision in the Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur. It is submitted that the writ petition against the College shall be dismissed. 16. Respondent No. 9 Vikas Aery has submitted in his reply that he applied for admission to 1st year of Bachelor of Engineering/Technology only in respondent No. 5-Engineering College, Kala Amb under Sports category and submitted his application complete in all respects along with fee of Rs. 500/-. He appeared in combined entrance test conducted by respondent-Regional Engineering College on 7.6.1998 under Roll No. 2250. He also stated that he has fulfilled all the conditions contained in paragraph 4(B) of the Prospectus issued by the Regional Engineering College. He secured 111 marks as per result card issued by the respondent-Regional Engineering College and applied under the Sports category in his application form. He was given additional weightage of 50 marks of sports on the basis of Gradation Certificate issued by the Director of Sports, Himachal Pradesh and secured 161 marks whereas the petitioner secured 152 marks and thus, being higher in merit the respondent is entitled for admission to IITT College of Engineering, Kala Amb. He also submitted that paragraphs 2.2.4.6 and 3.1 (g) of Admission Brochure issued by the Principal of respondent-College of Engineering Kala Amb are contradictory and confusing. He also submitted that paragraphs 2.2.4.6 and 3.1 (g) of Admission Brochure issued by the Principal of respondent-College of Engineering Kala Amb are contradictory and confusing. Paragraphs 2.2.4.6 provides that gradation for sports candidate seeking admission in the College shall be decided by a Committee of two persons to be constituted by the Principal of the College whereas paragraph 3.1 (g) of the same Brochure provides that the gradation certificates of the sportsmen from Director of Sports concerned is required to be submitted No pro forma in the form of Annexure-IX as given in the Admission Form issued by respondent No. 2 Director for nomination seats has been provided in the Admission-cum-information Brochure issued by the Principal of Engineering College, Kala Amb and for admission in Engineering College, Kala Amb under Sports category an affidavit in the prescribed pro forma as given at the end of Admission Brochure is required to be submitted and the answering respondent has furnished this affidavit duly attested by the 1st Class Magistrate. He submitted that in order to provide reasonable opportunity to ensure selection on merit the students including answering respondent were directed by the Admission Committee to produce sports gradation certificate on the above pro forma by 31.7.1998 to the Principal of Engineering College, Kala Amb and he submitted the original Sports Gradation Certificate to the Principal on 31.7.1998 duly authenticated by respondent No. 6 Director of Sports. On the basis of his in the written sttement, he has prayed that the Principal of respondent No. 5-College, Kala Amb may be directed to give admission to him. 17. At the initial stage of the notice served upon the Director-cum-Principal of respondent No. 5-College of Engineering, Kala Amb no appearance was put up by the said respondent and after repeated issue of notices and bailable warrants, an affidavit has been filed by Shri R.K. Prashar Vice Principal in which it has been stated that the advertisement given in Annexure-PA and Brochure for Admission were issued by the College under the authorization of Himachal Pradesh University. It has been stated that the College had opened authorized Centers at IITT Faculty Home at Chandigarh, IITT Camp Office, Delhi and at the H.P. University Campus at Shimla for the sale and submission of application forms for admission to the College and the said centres were opened to facilitate the candidates and after the completion of the application forms reached the office of the Deputy Registrar, IITT College of Engineering at Kala Amb by 5 p.m. upto 22nd July, 1998, the same were sent by Special messenger so as to reach the office of Deputy Registrar by the said time and date and after the applications were received at the College Campus these were sent to the respective Committees for consideration and it is also submitted that the sports quota applications were also sent to the Sports Counselling Committee constituted by the Director of Technical Education, H.P. and headed by the Registrar of the H.P. University and Director of Sports and also the Principal were members of the said Committee and that after counselling the candidates were to be admitted. It is also stated that as soon as the College received the notice of the petitioner the seat in the sports quota has been kept vacant and no candidate has been admitted so far by the College. 18. Ms. Rama Sinha, Chair Person of Board of Governors, IITT Society and Management Council, IITT College of Engineering Kala Amb who appeared pursuant to bailable warrants issued to her has filed separate affidavit and stated that the records summoned by the Court could not be presented to the Honble Court as she is not the Director-cum-Principal or the Principal of the College and was not concerned with this case. However, she has tendered her unconditional apology for causing any sort of inconvenience to the Court. We accept her apology and close the proceedings against her. 19. We have heard learned Counsel for the respective parties who have made their submissions based upon the stand taken in their respective written statements. 20. However, she has tendered her unconditional apology for causing any sort of inconvenience to the Court. We accept her apology and close the proceedings against her. 19. We have heard learned Counsel for the respective parties who have made their submissions based upon the stand taken in their respective written statements. 20. The main and only question deserves for our consideration is whether the application of respondent No. 9 could be entertained and accepted by the respondent-College of Engineering, Kala Amb admittedly received after the expiry of last date without submitting the Gradation Certificate for sportsmen from the Director of Sports, concerned as prescribed under paragraph 3.1 (g) of Admission Brochure of the College of Engineering, Kala Amb. In paragraph 1.2.1 of the Admission Brochure of respondent No. 5-College, it is specifically mentioned that the candidates must use the form for admission appended to the Brochure and the application must be filled in by the candidate in his own handwriting and on the prescribed official Application Form appended to this Brochure. In para 1.2.4 it is mentioned that "applications not submitted on the prescribed official Form or not in the candidates own handwriting or incomplete application, shall not be considered and all such applications shall be summarily rejected." Again in paragraph 1.2.6, it is stipulated that "applications complete in all respects should reach the Principal of the College on or before the closing date and time as notified." Application received late through mail will not be considered. The College does not take any responsibility for postal delay or its loss in transit. At the first page of the Admission Brochure important note has been published stating that candidates are advised to carefully read the Admission Brochure before applying for admission and last date of receipt of completed application form at the College Counter is stipulated up to 5 p.m. on 22.7.1998. Under the General Instructions heading in paragraphs 1.3.1, it is stipulated that every candidate must indicate in his/her application(s) the category of seats for which he/she wants to apply and if no mention is made about the category in his/her application, the candidate shall be considered only for General Category. No candidate will be considered for admission against any category in which he/she has not applied. 21. Mr. No candidate will be considered for admission against any category in which he/she has not applied. 21. Mr. K.D. Sood, learned Counsel for respondent-Engineering College, Hamirpur has shown to us the originals application form of respondent No. 9 and on such perusal we find that respondent No. 9 has made application to the Regional-College for admission in both the categories i.e. General and Sports. In the advertisement issued in The Tribune on July 17, 1998 under the authorization of Himachal Pradesh University by respondent College of Engineering, Kala Amb, it is specifically made known to the candidates that the application forms along with all required documents must reach the office of Deputy Registrar IITT College of Engineering at Kala Amb latest by 5 p.m. on 22.7.1998. Concedingly, the application submitted by respondent No. 9 to Shri R.K. Prashar at Chandigarh was incomplete in all respects because he has not submitted Gradation Certificate for sportsmen from the Director of Sports concerned along with his application form which was necessary condition under Para 3.1 of the Admission Brochure. Whenever a notification for calling applications fixed a date and time within which the applications are to be received whether sent through post or by another mode that time schedule has to be complied with in letter and spirit. If the application has not reached the Principal or Deputy Director of respondent-College of Engineering, Kala Amb as the case may be within fixed time the same cannot be considered as having been filed in terms of the provisions contained in the Prospectus or Information Brochure and Admission Notice Annexure-PA to the writ petition. Incomplete application filed by respondent No. 9 in violation of the terms of the Brochure and Admission Notice is only to be rejected as stipulated in paragraph 1.2.4 of the Admission Brochure. Respondents University. Conselling Committee and College of Engineering, Kala Amb have failed to bring to our notice any provision contained either in the Admission Brochure or in any regulations or Rules whereby the Counselling or Admission Committee has been authorized to extend the date and time for submitting the certificates after the expiry of the date of the submission of the applications and in the present case, the Gradation Certificate for sportsmen from Director of Sports concerned was permitted to be submitted by respondent No. 9 by July 31,1998. Thus, the Counselling/Admission Committee has no power or authority to extend the date for submitting the documents which were pre-requisite conditions prescribed in the Admission Brochure and Admission Notice after the expiry of the date of submission of the Application Forms along with the necessary documents. The Counselling/Admission Committee and respondent-College of Engineering, Kala Amb have adopted negative prohibitory words to bring home imperative nature of the provision contained in the Admission Brochure. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Lachmi Narain v. Union of India, AIR 1976 SC 714, observed, "if the provision is couched in prohibitive or negative language, it can rarely be directory, the use of peremptory language in a negative form is per se indicative of the intent that the provision is to be mandatory." The negative prohibitory words used in the Information Brochure go to establish the mandatory nature of that provision. It is settled law that negative prohibitory and exclusive words are clearly indicative of the mandatory nature of the provision. Negative words are ordinarily used to make a provision imperative. Since, the Information Brochure has used words "shall not be entertained", we are clear in our mind that the said provision is mandatory and no relaxation can be made tinkering with it. In this regard, reference may also be made to a decision of the Supreme Court in Mannalal Khetan v. Kedar Nath Khetan, AIR 1977 SC 536. While dealing with the provisions contained in Section 108 of the Companies Act which provided, "a company shall not register a transfer of shares...", their Lordships stated, "the words shall not register, are mandatory in character. The mandatory character is strengthened by the negative form of the language". Thus, the negative words used in the Brochure clearly indicate that the provision is imperative and is not to be violated. 22. The Information Brochure and Admission Notice (Annexure PA), in our view have the force of law and have to be strictly complied with and no modification can be made by any authority not competent to do so according to its whims, choice and fancies, if it is made variable, we are clear in our mind that it will lead to injustice, arbitrariness and unfair results. In such a situation, our considered opinion is that time and date of receipt of the application fixed in the Prospectus/Information Brochure and Admission Notice have to be strictly adhered to. Respondent No. 9 categorically stated in his reply-affidavit that he purchased the Admission Brochure of the respondent-College of Engineering, Kala Amb and submitted his complete application which statement is not correct as he himself has admitted that date for submitting the Gradation Certificate for sports was extended to him by the Counselling Committee till July 31, 1998. Thus, it is clear that his application on the last date of submission of the application form was incomplete and in violation of the conditions contained in paragraph 3.1 of the Admission Brochure and Admission Notice. Pro forma of affidavit prescribed in the Admission Form is part of the Admission form prescribed for showing that the candidate belongs to reserved category but it will not absolve respondent No. 9 from submitting his Gradation Certificate for sportsmen from the Director of Sports concerned with his application form which is a condition mandatory in character, and separate from filing the affidavit. The application was absolutely in violation of conditions stipulated in paragraph 1.2.4 of the Admission Brochure and it ought not to have been entertained and accepted by the respondent-College of Engineering, Kala Amb and no extension could be granted to respondent No. 9 by the Admission/Counselling Committee for submitting his certificate after the expiry of the date prescribed under the Admission Brochure and notified in the Admission Notice. The Committee has no authority or power to violate the conditions of the Brochure and prescribe its own date for submitting the certificate by exercising some unwarranted, unqualified and unwritten discretion. Thus, relaxation given by the Counselling Committee not specifically stated in the Advertisement and Admission Brochure is held to be without authority of law. The application of respondent No. 9 was also not in conformity with the Admission Notice Annexure-PA where under it is specifically stipulated that the Application Form along with all required documents must reach office of the Deputy Registrar IITT College at Kala Amb latest by 5 p.m. on 22nd July, 1998 and admittedly, he submitted his application at Chandigarh to Shri R.K. Prashar, and thus, he has violated the stipulations incorporated in the Admission Brochure and Admission Notice with immunity. 23. In Mrs. 23. In Mrs. Rekha Chaturvedi v. University of Rajasthan, JT 1993(1) SC 220 the apex Court held that "when the University or its Selection Committee relaxes the minimum required qualifications, unless it is specifically stated in the advertisement/notification both that the qualifications will be relaxed and also the conditions on which they will be relaxed, the relaxation will be illegal." 24. In the similar facts that are involved in the present case various High Courts have held that norms and procedure in Prospectus issued for admission to the Educational Institutions shall be complied with strictly by the authorities concerned and condoning defects in the applications by the authorities and allowing candidates to rectify the same after the last date of receipt of applications will be illegal. (See AIR 1992 AP 380, Miss. Romini Susan Kurian v, State of A.P. and others, AIR 1993 Mad 328; G. Sumathi v. The Director of Medical Education, Madras and others, AIR 1995 Mad 168; R. Maheswari v. Secretary, Selection Committee, Tamil Nadu Professional Courses, Madras and another, AIR 1996 Ker 109; A. Sainulabdin and another v. State of Kerala and others and AIR 1998 P&H 18 (Full Bench), Rahul Prabhakar v. Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar and others. We are, therefore, of the opinion that when the date, time and stipulation of enclosing the documents with the application form have been specified in the Advertisement and also in the Information Brochure, it must be strictly adhered to as otherwise it leads to uncertainty, unending process, anomaly and deprivation of equality clause and further it widens the competition amongst the candidates seeking admission into professional courses who had not complied with the stipulated essential conditions. It is also difficult to determine upto what period the time-limit can be extended and if such power is to be exercised, by the Committee or the College Authority, it will lead to arbitrariness. We hope and expect that in future the concerned authorities shall withdraw their hands from encouraging the practice of entertaining the applications whether complete or incomplete after the expiry of the date stipulated in the Admission Notice and Admission Brochure or extending the dates to the candidates for submitting their documents after the receipt of incomplete application within time. 25. We hope and expect that in future the concerned authorities shall withdraw their hands from encouraging the practice of entertaining the applications whether complete or incomplete after the expiry of the date stipulated in the Admission Notice and Admission Brochure or extending the dates to the candidates for submitting their documents after the receipt of incomplete application within time. 25. In the facts and for the above said reasons, we do not accept the submissions of the learned Counsel for respondents-University, College of Engineering, Kala Amb, Shri Vikas Aery and Selection/Counselling Committee. 26. In the result, for the above said reasons the writ petition is allowed. We quash the decision of the Admission Counselling Committee selecting respondent No. 9 for admission in the College of Engineering, Kala Amb in sports category. We find from copy of letter No. IITT/ADM/98-1666 dated 3.8.1998 addressed by the Principal College of Engineering, Kala Amb to the Vice Chancellor, H.R University, Shimla placed on record as Annexure R-4/A with the Affidavit of Shri Rajinder Singh, Registrar of the University filed in CMP No. 1218/98 requesting the Vice-Chancellor that urgent decision in the matter of filling up of seats against the sports quota be taken by him and name of petitioner who is at serial No. 2 has been recommended for allotment of the seat in the said category, we, therefore, direct that if the petitioner is found eligible based upon the merit list in the said category of sports quota, he shall be given admission in the College of Engineering, Kala Amb by the authorities without further loss of time as the seat is concedingly lying vacant. If the petitioner is not found eligible, the same may be allotted to the eligible candidate in accordance with the prescribed norms and procedure. However, the parties are left to bear their respective costs. Application for stay shall stand disposed of. Petition allowed.