JUDGMENT : Vineet Saran, CJ. - Learned counsel for the opposite parties state that they have received instructions. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. 2. Admitted facts of the case are that the petitioner was admitted to Bio-Medical Engineering course in NIT, Rourkela on 12.07.2016 after having qualified in the JEE Main Examination, 2016. It is submitted that the first two semesters have common course and thereafter the specialized courses start. It is not disputed by the parties that for the year 2016-17, out of 890 seats in the institute, there were only 789 students who have taken admission in the institute and 101 seats remained vacant. The petitioner thus made a representation to the NIT, Rourkela for change of her branch to one of the following three branches i.e., Chemical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Electronics and Communication Engineering and the said application not having been decided, petitioner filed W.P.(C) No. 16263 of 2016 which was disposed of on 18.05.2017 with the direction to the opposite party no.3 to decide the application of the petitioner for change in allocation of the branch. Pursuant thereto on 19.06.2017 opposite party no. 3 has passed an order wherein it has been stated that after the counseling for the year 2016-2017 was over and candidates were allotted institutions, role of opposite party no.3-Central Seat Allocation Authority was over and that the appropriate authority for change of the branch would be the institute, where the petitioner is pursuing her studies. 3. In the light of the aforesaid facts, this writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 19.06.2017 and also seeking for a direction to the opposite party no. 2-NIT Rourkela to upgrade the choice of the branch of the petitioner for her B.Tech. studies. 4. We have heard Shri Amiya Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Aurovinda Mohanty, learned counsel for the opposite party no.1-Union of India and Shri M.K. Pradhan, learned counsel for the Director, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela-opposite party no.2 and Chairman, Central Seat Allocation Authority-opposite party no. 3 and perused the record. Shri M.K. Pradhan, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties 2 & 3 has submitted that though earlier there was a provision for change of branch after 2nd semester but the said practice has been discontinued after 2010-2011. 5. 3 and perused the record. Shri M.K. Pradhan, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties 2 & 3 has submitted that though earlier there was a provision for change of branch after 2nd semester but the said practice has been discontinued after 2010-2011. 5. The admitted fact is that there are vacancies in other branches than the branch in which the petitioner is studying. It would not harm any of the parties nor would it serve any purpose if seats lie vacant in a particular branch where student wants to take admission but is being denied so, merely on technical ground. The petitioner is already studying in the same institute and pursuing Bio-medical Engineering course. 6. Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that the specialization course begins after the 2nd semester. As such, in our view, there will be no loss caused to any of the parties if the change in the branch from Bio-medical Engineering to one of the three choices given by the petitioner, is allowed by the opposite party no.2-institute. Accordingly we direct that in case there is any vacancy in respondent no. 2-institute, i.e., NIT, Rourkela in the branches of Chemical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering or Electronics and Communication Engineering, for the relevant academic session, NIT, Rourkela shall consider the application of the petitioner for such change depending on the availability of seats in such particular course. This writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above in the light of the observation made. Final Result : Allowed