V. V. S. RAO, J. ( 1 ) ORAL ORDER :the petitioner is a student of 3-year LL. B. Degree Course. He was admitted in Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Law college, the 1st respondent herein in the academic year 2000. He appeared for 1st and 2nd year examinations but still he has backlog subjects. When he was in 3rd year llb Course, the Semester system was introduced in LL. B. The University, however, in accordance with the University regulations, conducted 2001 main examinations and 2001 supplementary examinations. When the petitioner submitted application for 1st year examinations of supplementary in April/may 2003, the same was not accepted by the College. Therefore, he filed the writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to conduct another supplementary examination. ( 2 ) THE Counsel for the petitioner did not place any Rules before this Court. Therefore, learned standing Counsel for the osmania University was directed to produce the relevant Rules. Today the Rules and regulations governing 3-Year Degree courses of study has been placed before me. These regulations are applicable from academic Year 1998-99. As per Regulation 23, whenever a course or scheme of instruction is changed in a particular year, two more examinations immediately following thereafter shall be conducted according to the old syllabus/regulations. Candidates not appearing at the said examinations or failing in them shall take the examination/examinations subsequently according to the changed syllabus/regulations. ( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel for the University submitted that after introduction of new scheme of instruction two examinations are already conducted. Therefore, no further examination can be conducted. ( 4 ) THE petitioner is essentially seeking a direction which is not supported by any rules or regulations. When the University itself has made regulations providing for two more examinations whenever there is change in the course, it is not for this court to interfere in academic matters to issue a direction to conduct supplementary examinations, which is contrary to regulations. The writ petition is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.