(1.) PRESENT letters patent appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 3rd October, 2008 passed by learned Single Judge, whereby appellant's writ petition being W.P.(C) 4175/2007 was allowed and the order/letter dated 9th May, 2006 issued by respondent no. 2 was set aside. The relevant portion of the impugned order reads as under: -
(2.) MR . Ashok K. Mahajan, learned counsel for appellant submits that learned Single Judge failed to appreciate that Rule III has been in force since inception of the inter university competition and the said Rule has been consistently interpreted by respondent no. 2 right from the beginning to mean that it is not only the entries for the tournament, but actual participation of the teams which are relevant for recognizing the particular event leading to determination of the winner of MAKA Trophy. In support of his submission that consistent practice must be given preference while interpreting a rule, Mr. Mahajan relies upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in N. Suresh Nathan and Another Vs. Union of India and Others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 584 wherein it has been held as under: -
(3.) RULE III which deals with the entries and venues reads as under: -