' This judgment shall dispose of Writ Petitions Nos,906/92, 2176/92, 5433/92 and 5510/92, which arise under the similar circumstances and involve same questions of law.
2. The petitioners in all these petitions were admitted to the First Year Class of Diploma in Civil Engineering, in the Government College of Technology, Rasul, District Gujrat. It is not disputed that the petitioners had paid the admission fee and other dues to respondent No,2 and also that they continued attending classes during the first and second semesters of 1989.
3. From the record, it appears that the petitioners applied for permission to take the first year examination of the Diploma Course. Their application was allowed and the petitioners appeared in the examination held in the year 1990 and were declared successful and promoted to the Second Year Class. They are aggrieved of a Notification issued by respondent No,1 Board on 11-1-1992 cancelling their admission to the College on the ground that the same was irregular. This Notification has been challenged by the petitioners in this petition.
4. In the written statement filed by respondent No,1, the position taken is that the petitioners are not bona fide students but were admitted to the College after the last date fixed for the purposes of admission which was 10th October, 1989 and that they managed to procure the admission to the College in connivance with the Principal after the due date.
5. One of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have been condemned unheard inasmuch as before issuing the Notification removing their names from the rolls of the College, the petitioners were never issued any show-cause notice nor were they afforded any opportunity of being heard. It was emphasized that once the petitioners had been granted admission, allowed to attend the classes, and paid their fee, a right stood vested in them of which they could not be deprived except in accordance with law and the principles of natural justice. The learned counsel also pointed out that all the petitioners were promoted by the respondent Board after they had appeared in the First Year examination conducted by respondent No,1 itself.
6. Faced with this position, the learned Additional Advocate-General, has no objection if the case is remanded to the respondents for decision afresh after hearing the petitioneRs, ' In view of what has been stated above, these petitions are allowed, impugned Notifications are declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect, with the result that the petitioners continued to be students of respondent No,1 College. It shall, however, be open to the respondents to proceed afresh in the matter, after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard.
' No order as to costs.