S. B. SINHA, J. ( 1 ) THIS writ appeal is preferred against the order dated 8-9-2001 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder the learned Judge while disposing of the writ petition filed by the respondents herein observed: for all the aforesaid reasons, I am of the considered opinion that the University cannot cancel the provisional/notional admission of the students on the ground that they have not produced the transfer certificates and file the same before the authorities concerned immediately after completing their course of study of B. Ed. Facts : ( 2 ) THE factual background which led to the filing of the writ petition and subsequently this appeal is that the respondents are prosecuting their sureties in B. Ed. Course and the course would be completed by 21-9-2001. It is their case that though the classes for the said course was to commence by August 2000, the same could not commence as scheduled, having regard to the challenge made by some of the aggrieved students against the decision of the Government classifying the scheduled cases into various groups by enacting A. P. Scheduled Caste (Rationalisation of Reservation) Act, 2000 and granting of an interim order by the Court not to finalise the admissions and not to commence the classes, and also delay on the part of the Government and NCTE to grant permission to grant newly established B. Ed. Colleges. While the matter stood at that, the appellants-University issued notification of conducting entrance test for admission to PG Courses for the academic year 2001-2002 in the month of April, 2001, pursuant to which the respondents herein appeared for the entrance examination conducted faculty-wise by the University and obtained ranks. At the time of Counselling, among other certificates, the candidates are also required to submit the rank card of PG Entrance Test 2001, Entrance Hall Ticket, Transfer Certificate from the institution where the candidate last studied, original certificate of qualifying degree examination and consolidated memorandum of marks (Part-I and Part-II) of the qualifying degree examination. At the time of Counselling, among other certificates, the candidates are also required to submit the rank card of PG Entrance Test 2001, Entrance Hall Ticket, Transfer Certificate from the institution where the candidate last studied, original certificate of qualifying degree examination and consolidated memorandum of marks (Part-I and Part-II) of the qualifying degree examination. The University has notified specifically that all those who are on rolls in any institution as regular students or those who are registered in any correspondence course if fail to produce the transfer certificate issued by such an institution, they will be considered for notional admission only on the production of the certificate from the concerned principal/head of institution/college to the effect that the candidates have produced all the original certificates and the same, including the transfer certificate, will be released to the candidate if he/she is selected to the admission to PG. Course. Admittedly, the respondents herein were admitted notionally to prosecute the PG Course on the basis of their merit and marks assigned to them in the entrance examination, on the basis of the bona fide certificates given by the college certifying that they are undergoing B. Ed Course during the academic year 2000-2001 and the course will come to an end on 21-9-2001. The University, however, insisted for production of the transfer certificates and accordingly obtained an undertaking from the respondents herein that the said certificates would be produced on or before 14-7-2001. Questioning the said action of the University the respondents herein have preferred the writ petition apprehending that the University may cancel their provisional admissions made into PG Courses on the ground of non-production of the transfer certificates. Submissions : submissions on behalf of the Osmania University: ( 3 ) MR. K. Ramakanth Reddy, the learned Standing Counsel for Osmania University, inter alia submits that the learned single Judge having failed to appreciate the fact that mid-term admissions are disapproved by the apex Court, directed the University to admit the respondents herein, who have not yet completed the B. Ed Course they are prosecuting, into M. Sc. , Course. ( 4 ) IT is the case of the University that the respondents herein cannot be permitted to simultaneously prosecute their studies in B. Ed. , Course. ( 4 ) IT is the case of the University that the respondents herein cannot be permitted to simultaneously prosecute their studies in B. Ed. Course as well as PG Course and the rules in this regard being absolutely clear the University cannot be compelled to act contrary to their rules and regulations. Mr. Ramakanth Reddy further submits that as the respondents herein admittedly cannot put in 75% attendance in PG Course, having regard to the fact that the M. Sc. , Courses commenced on 16-7-2001 and the respondents herein would be writing the last paper of the B. Ed. Examination on 29-10-2001, the learned Judge ought not have passed the impugned order. ( 5 ) MR. Ramakanth Reddy contends that the learned single Judge has failed to appreciate Rule 7 of the General Rules for examinations, as also Instruction No. XV issued in the Instructions, Eligibility Conditions and Syllabus relating to Post-Graduate Entrance Test and Admissions -2001, which prohibit study of two courses at the same time simultaneously. ( 6 ) ACCORDING to the learned Counsel, if two interpretations are possible, as has been held by this Court as well as the Apex Court, normally the Court would not upset the interpretation of educational authorities. Even the ordinance issued in respect of disciplinary rules also do not permit simultaneous study or overlapping of courses simultaneously and in such case action is enunicated. Submissions on behalf of the students: ( 7 ) MR. G. Vidyasagar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents herein submits that the respondents have been prosecuting their studies in B. Ed Course and the same would come to an end only on 21-9-2001 and transfer certificates could be obtained and filed before the authorities only after 21-9-2001. The Counsel further submits that the B. Ed. Course commenced belatedly on account of the circumstances beyond the control of the respondents as well as the University and therefore, the respondents herein are not in a position to produce their transfer certificates and file the same on or before 14-7-2001 as is required by the Convenor, admissions for the reasons beyond their control. Relevant provisions: ( 8 ) THE Osmania University made regulations for M. Sc Degree Course under Course System, 1976 wherein General Rules for Examinations have been issued. Rule 7 of the General Rules read thus: "7. Relevant provisions: ( 8 ) THE Osmania University made regulations for M. Sc Degree Course under Course System, 1976 wherein General Rules for Examinations have been issued. Rule 7 of the General Rules read thus: "7. A candidate shall not be permitted to put in attendance, and/or appear at one and the same time or during the same academic year, for two University Examinations provided this rule does not apply to Certificate/diploma Courses in Foreign Languages or any other Diploma/certificate Course as permitted by the University from time to time. " ( 9 ) THE Osmania University has issued Instructions, Eligibility Conditions and Syllabus for Post-Graduate Entrance Test and Admissions-2001 wherein Instruction No. XV speaks about prohibition of simultaneous study. The same read thus: candidates are not permitted to pursue more than one course, at any point of time. If such cases are detected, the admission of the candidate in both the courses will be cancelled at any time. ( 10 ) THE University has also issued Rules and Regulations of Semester System in Post-Graduate Courses at Campus and Constituent Colleges in the Faculty of Science. Rule 11 deals with Duration and Course of Study. Sub-rule (iii) of Rule II, which is relevant for this case, reads thus: no admissions/re-admissions/promotions are to be made after the expiry of four weeks from the date of commencement of instruction. In case there are any Court cases consequent on which the Convenor of admissions is compelled to admit any candidate after the last date of admissions, the admission (seat) of such a student be reserved for the subsequent year on supernumerary basis. Finding. ( 11 ) THE University as noticed hereinbefore has fixed the following Almanac of B. Ed Course for the academic year 2000-2001 commencing from 1-12-2000 to 29-12-2001. 1. Commencement of classes : 1-12-2000 2. Short vacation :24- 12-2000 to 31-12-2000 or 15-1-2001 to 20-1-2001 3. Reopening :1-1-2001 or 22-1-2001 4. Community work :23-4-2001 to 30-4-2001 5. Summer vacation : 1-5-2001 to 14-6-2001 6. Reopening : 15-6-2001 7. Micro teaching :25-6-2001 to 29-6-2001 8. I round of demonstration : 2-7-2001 and 3-7-2001 9. I round of teaching practice : 5-7-2001 to 16-7-2001 10. 11 round of demonstration : 19-7-2001 and 20-7-2001 11. II round of teaching practice and internship :23-7-2001 to 7-9-2001 12. Principals meeting for finalisation of final :6-8-2001 and 7-8-2001 practical lessons schedules. 13. Last instruction day :21-9-2001 14. I round of demonstration : 2-7-2001 and 3-7-2001 9. I round of teaching practice : 5-7-2001 to 16-7-2001 10. 11 round of demonstration : 19-7-2001 and 20-7-2001 11. II round of teaching practice and internship :23-7-2001 to 7-9-2001 12. Principals meeting for finalisation of final :6-8-2001 and 7-8-2001 practical lessons schedules. 13. Last instruction day :21-9-2001 14. Final practical exams :22-9-2001 to 8-10-2001 15. Theory exams Paper I : 12- 10-2001 16. Paper VI :29-10-2001 ( 12 ) THE writ petitioners admittedly did not file the transfer certificates at the time of obtaining their admission. However, they were allowed to take provisional admission by filing undertakings in writing that they would file B. Ed. , transfer certificate on or before 14-7-2001 failing which the admission will be cancelled without any further reference. The contention of the writ petitioners is that the date has been put later on and their signatures were obtained on blank proforma. Such a contention cannot be accepted. ( 13 ) IT is trite that the University may insist upon the minimum percentage of attendance in classes before a student is permitted to appear at the examination. Attendance of classes is part of the academic discipline. Any statute governing the field must be given its full effect. ( 14 ) IN Dr. S. Suryanarayaua v. University of Health Sciences, 1997 (3) An. WR 207, it was observed: we are afraid, we cannot accede to this contention. The insistence of 85% attendance in the period of training is one of the eligibility criteria to take PG examinations, but 85% attendance has to be calculated with reference to the whole period of training. This rule has a rationale behind it. In any training, more so in a course of specialization, the optimum benefit can be derived by the students only when they undergo the training regularly and punctually. Absence upto a maximum of 15% of the training period is, however, considered by the University not detrimental to the training. A candidate cannot be permitted to claim, within the period of training, on completion of 85% of part of the training period that he is either entitled to take the examination which would be scheduled immediately thereafter or to join any other course as if the training period is over. Such an assumption will be erroneous. A candidate cannot be permitted to claim, within the period of training, on completion of 85% of part of the training period that he is either entitled to take the examination which would be scheduled immediately thereafter or to join any other course as if the training period is over. Such an assumption will be erroneous. ( 15 ) IT is, therefore, evident that a direction can be issued by the Court only if the same would not be in violation of a statutory provision. ( 16 ) FURTHERMORE, Regulation XV of the General Regulations clearly postulates: xv. Prohibition of simultaneous study: Candidates are not permitted to pursue more than one course, at any point of time. If such cases are detected, the admission of the candidate in both the courses will be cancelled at any time. ( 17 ) HOWEVER, the B. Ed Course of study is for the academic year 2000-2001 and the PG course of study is for the academic year 2001-2002. The period of PG course for which they applied is for a different academic year. Admittedly, the B. Ed Course came to an end on 21-9-2001. The writ petitioners have paid requisite fee for the PG course and they were granted provisional admission accordingly. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the ends of justice will be subserved if the matter is left at the hands of the competent authorities of the Universities to consider the matter afresh and take a decision within a reasonable time as to whether in a situation of this nature, the petitioners are eligible to appear at the examination. ( 18 ) WE make it clear that the observations are made keeping in view the peculiar facts of the case and cannot be considered as a precedent in any other case. ( 19 ) THE writ appeal is disposed of with the aforementioned directions. No costs.