JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant, whose grievance is that since he was admitted to Post-Graduation Course in the speciality of anesthesia vide office order dated 24th March, 1983 by the Principal and Controller of Dr. S.N. Medical College and attached hospitals, Jodhpur when the course was of two years but he could not avail that opportunity of completing the course and again sought admission in 1993 when under the curriculum prevalent as approved by the Medical Council of India and by University, the Post-Graduation course became of three years duration. 2. The case of the petitioner-appellant, in short, is that since he was admitted in 1983 for completing the Post Graduation Training Course under Registration No. 196 of 1982, he was entitled to complete the course within the duration as was prescribed under the regulations for 1982 when he was so admitted but would not be governed by the Post Graduate Syllabi prevalent in 1995. 3. The learned Single Judge has not countenanced this contention and dismissed the writ petition vide the order under appeal. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the petitioner-appellant's contention does not merit acceptance. From the perusal of order Annex. 3 it cannot be legitimately held that the remaining period of training course refers to duration of course which was then existing taking the benefit of the period spent under Registration No. 196/82. From the application (Annex. 2) of the petitioner himself, it is apparent that under the said admission he has worked only for one month. The contextual reading of Annex. 3 would lead to one conclusion that the the petitioner was allowed to avail the permission granted to him in 1982 for being admitted to courses in 1993 with an option of carrying with him the period of training which he has undergone under his previous registration but there is no indication that he was admitted to complete the course with old syllabi under this document. That being the position, we are of the opinion that the petitioner under the office order dated 12th August, 1993 (Annex. 3) was required to complete the entire duration of the Post-Graduation course then prevalent for which the period spent by him under Registration No. 196/82 was to be adjusted. That being the position, we are of the opinion that the petitioner under the office order dated 12th August, 1993 (Annex. 3) was required to complete the entire duration of the Post-Graduation course then prevalent for which the period spent by him under Registration No. 196/82 was to be adjusted. In this view of the matter, we do not find any merit in this appeal and same is hereby dismissed. 5. Before parting with the case we may clarify there is no dispute that the petitioner has appeared at all the examinations meant for Post-Graduation course. In the circumstances, it is made clear that if the petitioner has passed the examinations, he will not be required to re-appear but may be allowed to complete the training. 6. The result, which has been kept in sealed cover, may be declared at the close of the training period.Writ Petition Disposed as above. *******