Order Mr. Manoj Tondon, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted as follows: The petitioner was allowed recognition for the Sessions 1993-1995 to 2008-2010. For the Sessions 2009-2011, the petitioner deposited requisite fee. Inspection was done and recommendation was made by Jharkhand Academic Council (JAC in short) for permanent recognition, which will appear from the letter dated 29.12.2007 (Annexure-6). JAC issued a notice no. 12/2010 (Annexure-3) inter alia providing that only those colleges could apply for registration, which has been granted recognition for the Sessions 2009-2011. But such condition was relaxed by a subsequent notice no. 23/2010 (Annexure-4) in which it was provided in Clause-2 that those colleges can also apply for registration for the Sessions 2009-2011, which have not been granted recognition but the recognition has been recommended to the Government and, therefore, in view of the Annexure-6 letter dated 29.12.2007, when the recognition was pending, the respondents should have allowed registration of Intermediate Science and Commerce also. Mr. Tondon admitted that so far as Intermediate Arts course is concerned, permanent recognition has been granted by the Government in 2010 by letter dated 24.5.2010. 2. In reply, Mr. Anwar, learned senior counsel appearing for the JAC, submitted that the petitioner was not recognized for the Sessions 2009-11 for Commerce and Science. In support of the specific statement made in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was recommended for Arts only, he produced a copy of letter dated 6.12.2007, referred in Annexure-6 letter. He submitted that the petitioner was knowing well that the recommendation was not made for Science and Commerce courses. He further submitted that the students of the petitioner's college were earlier allowed to appear in Science and Commerce courses, without recognition or permission of establishment, wrongly and contrary to the law and, therefore, such illegality cannot be allowed to be perpetuated. 3. Thus, it is clear that recognition was granted to the petitioner only for Arts Course and, accordingly, the students of that course were registered and were allowed to take part in the examination. Only because the students of Science and Commerce were allowed registration earlier, that cannot become a ground to claim that even if no recognition was granted for Science and Commerce courses, registration should be allowed in those courses. 4. In the result, I find no merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly, dismissed.