ORDER Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.—Petitioners have sought for quashing Annexure-R-endorsement dated 12-9-2012 and for a direction to the respondents to declare the University to issue affiliation to the academic year 2010-11 and renewal for 2011-12 in relation to post-graduate course in MBA in terms of the approval by the AICTE and the recommendation of the State Government to the petitioner and further direct the University to declare the result of I and II Semester MBA examination for the year 2011-12 and of IV Semester of the 2010-11 held by Krishna School of Management during July 2012 as per the schedule detailed. Petitioner is a Trust established on 23-6-1990 and is running a school by name India International School as well as Pre-University Course and degree college and other disciplines including an Engineering College. It is also running a college for MBA course, in the name and style of Sri Krishna School of Management. The grievance of the petitioners is, even though documents are produced by them which clearly establish that they have sought for affiliation from the respondent for its MBA course for which valid sanction of the Government as well as the AICTE for the academic year 2010-11 is available, and also affiliation/approval of the AICTE which has granted approval in the name of Sri Krishna School of Management being a provisional affiliation, the results of I and II Semester examinations have not been announced denying the students admitted during the academic year 2011-12 from appearing for the examinations and also for having kept pending the application for continuation of affiliation for the said year, writ petitions were filed in W.P. Nos. 5269 and 5270 of 2012 and other connected matters for a mandamus to consider their applications as well as recommendation of the Government as per Section 59(2) of the Karnataka State Universities Act, 2000. It is submitted, based on the undertaking, writ petitions were disposed of by order dated 17-8-2012-Annexure-P. 2. It is also the submission of the petitioners' Counsel, without there being an opportunity afforded, with an ulterior motive, decision has been taken by the respondent-University rejecting the affiliation which necessitated the petitioners to approach this Court. 3. Heard the Counsel representing the respective parties. Statement of objections is also filed on behalf of the respondent-University. 4. It is also the submission of the petitioners' Counsel, without there being an opportunity afforded, with an ulterior motive, decision has been taken by the respondent-University rejecting the affiliation which necessitated the petitioners to approach this Court. 3. Heard the Counsel representing the respective parties. Statement of objections is also filed on behalf of the respondent-University. 4. Annexure-J is the letter of the AICTE referring the name of the institution as Krishna School of Management, addressed to the Principal Secretary to the Government, Higher Education Department wherein permission has been accorded/approved for two years from the date of letter i.e., 14-7-2010. In the letter it is also made specific that the approval is valid for two years from the date of issue of the letter for getting affiliation with the respective University and fulfilling such requirement for admission. It is needless to say, petitioners had been granted approval by the AICTE. So also it has been communicated to the State Government in this regard. Much prior to that, State Government could have recommended the case of the petitioners. The grievance of the respondent-University is, petitioners have not approached the respondent-University as per requirement seeking approval/affiliation of the colleges as per the approval granted by the AICTE insofar as MBA Course is concerned. Further, the applications are not filed on time. 5. It is the submission of the Counsel representing the University that for the academic year 2010-11, petitioners have not filed any application for affiliation except in the name of Abhyudaya Trust. Of course, for the academic year 2011-12, the application for approval/renewal filed is in the name of Krishna School of Management. It appears there is a confusion amongst the petitioners as to the mode in which they have to apply to the University i.e., either in the name of Abhyudaya Education Trust or Krishna School of Management. If any such applications are being filed despite recommendation of the Government after the report submitted as per Section 59 of the Universities Act, it is for the respondent-University to consider the same. If any such applications are being filed despite recommendation of the Government after the report submitted as per Section 59 of the Universities Act, it is for the respondent-University to consider the same. Further, the Local Inspection Committee report if it is submitted of which the University is not aware, it is for the petitioners to request the University afresh to consider their application for the academic year to come i.e., 2013-14 for admission and also such application for renewal/fresh grant of affiliation in view of the AICTE letter at Annexure-J. Furthermore, what is noted in the letter issued on 14-7-2010 addressed to the Government indicating the name of the petitioner as Krishna School of Management is, affiliation is granted for two years. The petitioners may have to once again seek approval from the AICTE for the ensuing years. Simultaneously, they also have to approach the University by filing an application for affiliation on such fresh grant of permission by the AICTE. 6. It is submitted by the Counsel for the respondent that in the situation confronted, arrangements have been made to the students who have been admitted and pursuing the course in the college of the petitioner by accommodating them elsewhere and also it is submitted, those students who have been admitted have been taken care of by accommodating them in other colleges as well and are permitted to pursue the course. However, if the University has not declared the results of those students, the respondent-University is directed to announce the results. So far as ambiguity in the petitioner-Trust and the Institution is concerned, that could be clarified by correspondence and if the petitioners have not applied properly, it is for them to approach the respondent-University and seek clarification and act according to law. With the above observation, petitions are disposed of.