RAKESH TIWARI, J. Heard Counsel for the petitioners, Standing Counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of respondent No. 1, Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh who has accepted notice on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3 and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned order dated 23. 7. 2008 passed by respondent No. 1, contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The petitioner also prays for is suance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 1 to pass an order of per manent affiliation in favour of petitioners institution for running the B. Ed, course with annual in take of 100 seats from the academic session 2007. 3. Sri Bhagwan Singh Mahavidyalaya is a self-financed institution, which had earlier preferred Writ Petition No. 49642 of 2007 praying for grant of affiliation for B. Ed, course for the academic session 2006-07. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of by the High Court directing the office of the Chancellor Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University to transmit the papers with regard to petitioners institution to the Principal Secretary Higher Education for taking appropriate decision in terms of section 37 (2) of Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973. A further direction was also issued by the High Court to Chancellor to take steps within one month from the date of production of certi fied copy and the State Government to take decision in accordance with law preferably within next two months thereafter. 4. Section 37 (2) of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 was amended by which power of affiliation is vested with State Government in stead of the Chancellor. After the matter regarding affiliation was subse quently of the petitioners institution for academic session 2006-07 was referred to the State Government, certain information was sought from the University vide letter dated 7. 1. 2008. The University in turn supplied the information. According to the information received by the State Government the petitioner-institution along with several others admitted students on their own for the academic session 2005-06. 5. Pursuant to the order dated 24. 4. 2006 passed in Writ Petition No. 944 (M/s)/2006 filed at Lucknow Bench of the High Court, wherein the Court rely ing upon a Full Bench decision of the High Court, vide its order dated 31. 3. 5. Pursuant to the order dated 24. 4. 2006 passed in Writ Petition No. 944 (M/s)/2006 filed at Lucknow Bench of the High Court, wherein the Court rely ing upon a Full Bench decision of the High Court, vide its order dated 31. 3. 2008 held the admissions made in contravention of the provisions of N. C. T. E. Regulation and the U. P. State Universities Act, 1973 to be illegal. As when the admissions therefore made by the petitioners for the session 2005-06 were ille gal. The examination for the session July/august, 2007 were also cancelled by the State Government in view of judgment rendered by the Lucknow Bench of High Court in Writ Petition No. 5566 (M/s) of 2007. 6. The contention of the Counsel for the petitioner is that from the im pugned order it is apparent that there are two objections of the State Government regarding grant of affiliation to the petitioner which have been detailed in paragraph-6 of the said order as under: @hindi@ 7. In paragraph-46 of the writ petition it has been averred that the insti tution had not admitted any student in B. Ed, course for the academic session 2006-07 which is evident from its reply dated 11. 6. 2008 addressed to the Deputy Registrar, Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra and submitted that the petitioner could not have even admitted any student as there was no order of affiliation in favour of the petitioner-institution for the academic ses sion 2006-07. It is stated that in this view the averments made in the impugned order dated 23. 7. 2008 are incorrect. The Counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the paragraph 17 of the rejoinder affidavit wherein the aforesaid fact has been reiterated as under: "that in reply to the contents of para 21 of the counter-affidavit, con tents of paras 36 and 37 of the writ petition are reiterated. It is further stated that the petitioner has never admitted the students in session 2006-07 but only distributed the admission forms in anticipation of receiving permanent affiliation, as the recommendation for affiliation was made by the University on Prapatra-A. " 8. Standing Counsel is rebuttle has placed paragraph Nos. 26 and 27 of the counter-affidavit in paragraph No. 27 of the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent No. 1 it has been averred that petitioner has himself admitted in his letter dated 15. Standing Counsel is rebuttle has placed paragraph Nos. 26 and 27 of the counter-affidavit in paragraph No. 27 of the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent No. 1 it has been averred that petitioner has himself admitted in his letter dated 15. 5. 2008 that he has taken admissions in anticipation of af filiation for the session 2006-07 in the institution. Copy of the letter is also an nexed. 9. In Paragraph No. 26 of the counter-affidavit it has been annexed that the petitioner institution has illegally admitted 100 students without getting affiliation in utter contravention of the provisions of N. C. T. E. Regulations and Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973. 10. It is urged by the standing Counsel that in the circumstances of the case the State Government was left with no choice but to reject the proposal for grant of affiliation which was unlawful as the admissions made in contraven tion of the N. C. T. E. Regulation and Uttar Pradesh State University Act was unlawful and if admission is granted it would tantamount to legalizing the ad missions made by petitioners institution. 11. Having heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record, it appears that petitioner on the one hand is claiming that he has not taken any admission of students when the institute was not recognised by N. C. T. E. Regulations and the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 for the academic session 2005-06 and on of the other hand in its letter dated 15th May, 2008 the institution admitted that admission of students for session 2005-06 in anticipation of affiliation letter dated 15. 5. 2008 is as under: @@@@@@@@@@hindi@@@@@@@ 12. Whether the petitioner institution has taken admission of students in the B. Ed, course when the institution was not recognised or unaffiliated is a question of fact which has to be looked into by the competent authority. 13. Categorically stand of the State Government is that the students have been admitted by the petitioner-institution with affiliation in anticipation, of recognition which is against the provision of law as no admission of the stu dents could be taken by the institution when it was not affiliated to the University and not recognised by N. C. T. E. 14. Learned Counsel for the petitioner insist and has urged that in spite of writing letter dated 15. 10. Learned Counsel for the petitioner insist and has urged that in spite of writing letter dated 15. 10. 2008 they had not taken any admission for the aca demic session 2006-07 therefore the State Government may reconsider grant of affiliation to the petitioner-institution. 15. In view of the statement made by the Counsel for the petitioner that no admission has been taken by the petitioner-institution for the academic session 2006-07 in B. Ed, course, as affiliation was not granted to it the writ petition is disposed of remanding the matter back to the State Government for deciding the same in accordance with law after considering all the facts and circum stances by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 11. No order as to costs. Petition Disposed Of. .