“42. The petitioners’ submission that no delay could be attributed to them as the real prejudice, which provoked them to move this Court, was the issuance of the Notification dated 16 August 2022, notifying that credits earned against the Foundation Course under the BDP would not be counted towards the credit requirement under the CBCS consequent on taking fresh admission, has merely to be urged to be rejected. The Notification dated 6 October 2020 and the Notification dated 16 August 2022 envisaged two different dispensations, completely unconnected to each other. The petitioners may claim to be aggrieved by both; their grievance, with respect to each, however, is distinct and different from their grievance with respect to the other. The Notification dated 6 October 2020 withdraws the facility of readmission available under Clause 6.7 of the Prospectus, and applies the decision to old students as well. The Notification dated 16 August 2022 has, however, nothing to do with the facility of re-admission envisaged by Clause 6.7 of the Prospectus. It deals, rather, with the facility of fresh admission, in the event of the student being unable to clear the required credits or complete all papers within the “extended” period of 8 years, after having exhausted the benefit of Clause 6.7. It concerns itself with the issue of whether the credits earned by the student during the initial period of 8 years can be reckoned towards the credit requirement which the student has to fulfil after obtaining fresh admission.
