' MAZHAR HUSSAIN MINHAS, J . --- Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted parawise comments whereby it has been pointed out that on the last date of admission of the application, petitioner was overage by five months and four days and she deliberately concealed this fact in the admission form. Photo copy -of the admission form has been annexed with the parawise comments in which date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 14-2-1982 but the column for the age in terms of years, months and days has been left blank. Although column of age has been left blank by the petitioner, but date of birth is mentioned therein, therefore, it was responsibility of the department also to check this omission at the relevant time.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents has further submitted that under the Regulations 13 of the Admission Rules and Regulations for the year 2008 the remedy of appeal was available to the petitioner, but she has not availed that remedy, therefore, the writ petition is not competent. In response to this objection, learned counsel has submitted photo copy of the appeal drafted on 20- 10-2008 and admitted to the Vice-Chancellor of the University through post on 24-10-2008 which is still pending unattended. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the worthy Vice-Chancellor of the University to constitute the Appellate Admission Committee, which shall dispose of petitioner's appeal within seven days positively. If petitioner does not succeed before Appellate Admission Committee she would be entitled to refund of admission fee from the University because the respondents have also committed negligence by not computing the age of the petitioner at the time of admission.