A. V. SRINIVASA REDDY, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner seeks for a writ of certiorari quashing the letters bearing Nos. ACA/f/ns-37/99-2000/128 and No. ACA/f/pt-41/99-2000/126 dated 29-4-2000 produced as Annexures J-1 and J-2 to the writ petition and for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the letter of withdrawal dated 20-2-2000. ( 2 ) THE facts leading to this petition, briefly stated, are as under :the petitioner in pursuance of notification dated 25-8-1999 issued by the respondent inviting applications from existing colleges for starting new colleges or additional courses or for increase intake of Health Sciences for the year 1999-2000 approached the respondent and tendered two demand drafts of Rs. 1,00,000/- each drawn on Canara Bank, Sarakki Layout Branch, Bangalore favouring respondent and seeking fresh affiliation to start B. Sc. Nursing and B. Sc. Physiotherapy (Paramedical course ). The local inquiry committee inspected the institution and submitted its report suggesting granting of affiliation for B. Sc. (Nursing) and for B. Sc. (Physiotherapy) with intake of 40 and 25 respectively. But this suggestion was not accepted by the A. C. and the Syndicate both of whom declined recommendation for fresh affiliation. This decision was taken by the A. C. on 5-4-1999 and by the Syndicate on 15-4-1999. After the decision was taken by the A. C. and the Syndicate the petitioner on 20-2-2000 wrote to the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Karnataka to refund the deposit of Rs. 2,00,000/- made by the petitioner towards the application for affiliation made to the University. The respondent replied to the letter stating that under Sub. Sec. X (C) and (1) of S. VI no refund can be allowed as the application of the petitioner was fully considered, final orders passed thereon and the final orders were sent to Government for consideration. Aggrieved by the said communication the petitioner has presented the present petition for quashing of the said communication and for directing the respondent to refund the deposit made by it. ( 3 ) HEARD the learned counsel on both sides. ( 4 ) THE rule governing the refund of application fee for affiliation is the proviso to Rule 6 (II) of Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Karnataka. ( 3 ) HEARD the learned counsel on both sides. ( 4 ) THE rule governing the refund of application fee for affiliation is the proviso to Rule 6 (II) of Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Karnataka. The said proviso reads :"provided that in case of applications for affiliation of new colleges to the University, the fees paid shall be refunded in the following cases : (a) In the event of the application being withdrawn before the inspection an amount of Rs. 3000/- shall be deducted as application fee and the balance be refunded to the applicant. (b) If the application is withdrawn after inspection an amount of Rs. 5000/- shall be deducted and the balance be refunded to the applicant. (c) No refund shall be allowed in cases where the application has been fully considered and final orders passed either accepting or rejecting the request for affiliation of the college to the University. NOTE : (1) No refund will be allowed after sending the proposal /affiliation application etc. , to the State Government for consideration and orders. (2) to (4 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In the present case the inspection was done on 10-2-1999 and recommendation was made for grant of affiliation after a re-inspection of the infrastructure and the staff. But this recommendation was not accepted by the AC and the Syndicate who have recommended the rejection of the request for affiliation. The inspection report, the recommendation of the A. C. and the Syndicate have been sent to the Government for considering the grant of affiliation on 26-4-1999 by the respondent-University. This fact has been informed to the petitioner by the University by its letter dated 26-4-1999. Along with the letter the respondent had also enclosed the LIC report, AC recommendation and Syndicate decision. Even according to the petitioner he addressed the letter to the respondent withdrawing his application for affiliation only on 20-2-2000 by which date the proposal /affiliation application was already forwarded to the State Government for consideration. Note (1) of the proviso to Rule 6 makes it abundantly clear that no refund will be allowed after sending the proposal/affiliation application etc. to the State Government for consideration and orders. Note (1) of the proviso to Rule 6 makes it abundantly clear that no refund will be allowed after sending the proposal/affiliation application etc. to the State Government for consideration and orders. As that stage had already been crossed on 26-4-1999 itself, the letter addressed to the respondent by the petitioner on 20-2-2000 withdrawing his request for affiliation is of no consequence. The letter seeking withdrawal of the request for affiliation would not be of any assistance to the petitioner to over come the liability that he would in-cur under Note (1) to proviso to Rule 6 of the Rules. Therefore, he is not entitled to the refund of the affiliation fees deposited by him. ( 5 ) I find no merit in the writ petition and it is dismissed accordingly. Petition dismissed. --- *** --- .