JUDGMENT Hon’ble Vineet Saran, J.—The petitioner-college was initially granted affiliation with the Purvanchal University on 14.8.1999 for running B.A. course in six subjects for a period of 3 years. The said affiliation was extended by the Purvanchal University for a further period of 3 years on 30.8.2003, meaning thereby that the affiliation was to continue till the Session 2005-06. According to the Government Order issued on 30.11.2004, the affiliation of the colleges was thereafter to be made on the basis of territorial jurisdiction of the Universities. Under the provisions of the said Government Order, the petitioner-college was now to seek affiliation from the respondent-Chhattrapati Sahoo Ji Maharaj Kanpur University. By the letter dated 21.9.2006 issued by the respondent-University, the petitioner has been granted temporary affiliation for a period of 3 years with effect from 1.7.2006 but with the condition that the intake of students for B.A. Part I would be only 360. Aggrieved by the condition of limiting the intake of students, the petitioner has filed this writ petition, with the further prayer that the sanctioned strength of intake of students of B.A. Part I in the petitioner-college be increased to 900 students. 2. I have heard Sri P.N. Saxena, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri J.P.N. Singh, on behalf of the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 and Sri Neeraj Tiwari, learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondents No. 2 and 3 - Chhattrapati Sahoo Ji Maharaj Kanpur University. Pleadings between the contesting parties have been exchanged and with consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage. 3. The case of the petitioners is that earlier when the petitioner-institution was affiliated with the Purvanchal University, they were permitted to admit students in the proximity of 900 as in the Session 2004-05, 809 students had appeared in B.A. Part I from the petitioner-institution and in the Session 2005-06, 896 students appeared. On such basis the petitioner-institution granted admission to 720 students in the current Session 2006-07. The petitioners submit that they have adequate building and infrastructure, as well as teaching staff for imparting education to 900 students and the condition of restricting intake of students to only 360 is wholly unreasonable and without any valid basis. 4. On such basis the petitioner-institution granted admission to 720 students in the current Session 2006-07. The petitioners submit that they have adequate building and infrastructure, as well as teaching staff for imparting education to 900 students and the condition of restricting intake of students to only 360 is wholly unreasonable and without any valid basis. 4. Sri Neeraj Tiwari, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-University has submitted that since the petitioners could not produce the affiliation order of the Purvanchal University permitting the petitioner-institution to admit students upto 900, the said permission cannot be granted. However, the petitioners assert that there was no condition of limiting the students by the earlier University and 809 and 896 students had appeared from the petitioner-college in the last two sessions, which itself substantiates their claim of the earlier University permitting them to admit students upto 900. 5. In my view, since the petitioners had more than 800 students in the previous two sessions and this year they have admitted 720 students on a legitimate expectation that the new affiliating University would grant such permission, as was done by the earlier University with which the petitioner-college was affiliated for past 6 years, it would now be unreasonable to limit the number of students to 360 for the Session 2006-07, as has been provided in the order dated 21.9.2006. 6. However, it is true that the petitioner-college has to abide by the conditions of affiliation of the respondent-University from which they are now seeking affiliation but because the admissions in the Session 2006-07 must have been made prior to issuance of the letter and the condition of limiting the number of students had been made subsequently, hence balancing the equities and keeping the interest of the students into consideration, as it would be difficult for the petitioner-institution or the respondent-University to pick and choose 360 students for appearing in the examination, out of 720 students who are already studying in B.A. Part I, especially when the examinations are scheduled to be held shortly, it would be desirable that for the current session the University permits all the 720 students to appear in B.A. Part I examination. 7. Accordingly, the condition imposed in the affiliation order dated 21.9.2006 is modified to the extent that for the Session 2006-07, the number of students intake for the petitioner-college in B.A. Part I course would be 720. 8. 7. Accordingly, the condition imposed in the affiliation order dated 21.9.2006 is modified to the extent that for the Session 2006-07, the number of students intake for the petitioner-college in B.A. Part I course would be 720. 8. This writ petition stands allowed to the said extent. However, for the Session 2007-08 onwards, the petitioner may represent to the Vice Chancellor, Chhattrapati Sahoo Ji Maharaj Kanpur University, respondent No. 2 for increasing the seats from 360 to whatever number they can justify within the norms, within 15 days from today, alongwith all the requisite documents supporting their case for increase of seats. On receipt of such representation, the respondent No. 2 shall either himself or through any other competent officer, duly authorized by him, get the petitioner-college duly inspected and see whether as per the norms of the University the petitioner-college would be entitled to increase in the number of students intake and pass appropriate reasoned orders, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, preferably before 15th May, 2007 so that the petitioner-institution may then give admission to such number of students alone, as may be permitted by the respondent-University. No costs. ————