Judgment :- 1. These writ petitions are filed seeking for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 27.11.2009 Ref.Letter Nos.46368 and 46369/ECA1/2009 and quash the same in so far as the stoppage of approval of the students viz., W.P.No.25966/2009 W.P.No.25967/2009 1. C.Hephzibah Jacintha Paul-MBA 1. R. Rufus Vinay- MBA 2. V.Sridhara Rao -MBA 2. A.Kathija - MBA 3. M.Jeevitha -MBA 3. Steffi Christana- MBA 4. R.Vinoth Kumar -MBA 4. G.Balasubramani - MBA 5. Abul Kalam Aminur Islam-MCA 5. C.Komala- MCA 6. Amit Singh -MCA 6. G.Sabarinathan- MCA 7. Gaurav Sharma-MCA 7. R.Harishkumar -MCA 8. E.Ramesh -MCA 9. Nallapati Naresh -MCA admitted in the petitioner college during the academic year 2009-10 for non-production of mark sheets of entrance examination conducted by the Consortium of Colleges and direct the respondent authorities herein to approve the admission of the aforesaid students. 2. Since the issues involved in both these writ petitions are one and the same, these writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by this common order. 3. During the academic year 2009-10, the petitioner college admitted the students for MBA and MCA courses. The entrance examination was conducted by the University as well as the Government of Tamil Nadu for the admission of students of MBA and MCA courses. However, for several academic years, the availability of seats in colleges is more in number than the number of students seeking admission. As such, the lapsed seats have to be filled up on the basis of the basic eligibility prescribed by the authorities. Hence, the petitioner admitted students based on their basic eligibility. The second respondent refused to approve the admission by the impugned order dated 27.11.2009. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. 3. As such, the lapsed seats have to be filled up on the basis of the basic eligibility prescribed by the authorities. Hence, the petitioner admitted students based on their basic eligibility. The second respondent refused to approve the admission by the impugned order dated 27.11.2009. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. 3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Honble Supreme Court by an order dated 29.11.2004 in W.P.(Civil) No.350 of 1993 has clarified on the admission of students based on their basic eligibility in the Engineering Colleges as follows: "Having heard Learned Counsel for the parties and without the order being treated as a precedent, we permit the Engineering Colleges in these two States to fill the unfilled seats, whether of Management Quota or of Government Quota, within a period of one week subject to the condition that only those who are otherwise eligible and qualified would be granted admissions, though they may not have taken either of aforesaid Entrance examination. Any higher standards fixed by the State Governments would be required to be completed while granting admissions" Following the judgment of the Apex Court, several orders passed in various Writ Petitions by this Court, giving directions to approve the admission of students who did not participate in the entrance examination on the basis of basic eligibility. Likewise, a similar direction could be given in this case also. In support of his contention the learned counsel for the petitioner had also produced the order dated 29.03.2010 passed in W.P.No.25886 of 2009. 4. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 5. By following the dictum laid down by the Apex Court and also by taking the order of this Court passed in W.P.No.25886 of 2009 as the guideline, the prayer in the present writ petition is allowed .Further it is represented by the petitioner that the last date for payment of examination fee for second year had expired on 15.04.2010. Hence, appropriate direction could be given to the authorities to receive the fees. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the first respondent is directed to receive the examination fees by extending a period for another one week from 15.04.2010. 6. With these observations and directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.