Locus standi and ineffective writ relief bar challenge to an already advanced college admission.

A writ challenge to admission in an agricultural college failed because the petitioners had no locus standi to question seats created for categories to which they did not belong. The Supreme Court also found that the course was already substantially advanced, with the admitted student having attended classes and passed examinations, so reversing the admission would cause serious prejudice and leave any substitute candidate to restart the course. On those facts, the writ remedy was held to be ineffective and unjust, the High Court's order could not stand, and the challenge was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging admission to the agricultural college was maintainable at the instance of the petitioners, and whether the relief granted by the High Court could be sustained when the petitioners were not entitled to any of the newly created reserved seats and the course was substantially advanced.

Analysis: The petitioners did not belong to any of the categories for whom the additional seats had been created. They therefore had no legal interest or standing to seek quashing of the admission made against those seats. The Court also noted that the postgraduate course was nearing completion and that the appointee had already attended classes and passed examinations. Reversing the admission at that stage would cause serious prejudice to the appellant, while any substituted candidate would still have to start the course afresh and undergo the full period of study. In these circumstances, the writ relief was inappropriate and would work injustice rather than provide effective redress.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and the High Court's order could not stand; the appeal succeeded and the writ petition was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The judgment restored the appellant's admission and rejected the challenge to the High Court's interference, holding that the petitioners lacked standing to obtain the relief and that the circumstances made the writ remedy ineffective and unjust.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition challenging an admission will fail where the petitioners lack locus standi to claim the seats in question and the relief, if granted, would be ineffective or unjust in the circumstances of the case.

---