Judgment 1. The petitioner seeks a direction for admission to the M.Ed course for the Session 2006-07 on the basis of her own merit. 2. Case of the petitioner is that she applied for admission to M.Ed course for the Session 2006-07 and was fully eligible and entitled for admission on merit but she was not given admission, apparently on the ground that she did not submit result of B.Ed. which had not been declared till then. Legal notice was given and in the reply the claim of the petitioner on merit was not specifically disputed and one of the reasons given was that copy of B.Ed. and M.Sc. result way not attached with the application form. 3. Vide order dated 15.12.2006, while giving, time for filling reply the petitioner was directed to be given provisional admission with a clear stipulation that such admission will not vest any right on the petitioner. 4. In the reply filed, the stand taken is that the petitioner has wrongly stated that she secured 71.1 points in B.Sc. examination, 68.5 points in B.Ed. examination and 5 points being Post Graduate i.e. M.Sc. She further wrongly stated that she secured 145 points. She wrongly added marks obtained in B.Sc. exams. The petitioner secured only 67.19 points and she was at Sr. No. 54 in the merit list. Her provisional admission overlooked the merit of other candidates such as Anu Sharma who secured 71.36 points. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Though, we would have dismissed the petition on account of incorrect facts being mentioned but we find that the averments which have been mentioned in the reply were not mentioned in the reply to the legal notice, which the petitioner gave. It was not mentioned that any person other than the petitioner had higher merit. 7. Even though, the order of provisional admission did not create any equity in favour of the petitioner, we find that inspite of interim order having been passed on 15.12.2006, the respondents have been seeking adjournments and the whole year has already been completed. The course was for one year. The petitioner has already appeared in the examination after completing the studies. 8. In view of above special circumstances, we are of the view that it will be in the interest of justice to regularise the admission already given. 9. The course was for one year. The petitioner has already appeared in the examination after completing the studies. 8. In view of above special circumstances, we are of the view that it will be in the interest of justice to regularise the admission already given. 9. The petition is disposed of accordingly. Petition allowed.