Harbans Singh Rai, J. - This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that her form for participating in PMT Test be taken as one for MBBS and BDS course both and she should be treated as a sportsperson for giving weightage. 2. The petitioner appeared in PMT test held by Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak (hereinafter called the University) on June, 10, 11 and 12, 1989. She was placed at Nos. 96-98 of the Merit List for MBBS/BDS Course. The PMT test is held for admission to MBBS/BDS Course. According to the application form, the applicant is entitled to be considered for MBBS and BDS Course both in that order or he can only for MBBS or only for BDS or he can exercise his choice first BDS and then MBBS or vice versa. The petitioner applied for admission to MBBS Course only. 3. On June 23, 1989, she sent a representation Annexure P-1 praying that she be considered for MBBS and BDS both. 4. While filling up the form, the petitioner had not claimed any weightage as a sportsperson and had deleted "Yes" against column No. 9 thereby conveying that she was not claiming any weightage. At the time of interview, she made a representation along with the Gradation Certificate awarded by the Director, Sports, Chandigarh, alleging that she has wrongly been not awarded the weightage marks qua sports which she was entitled to and she should be considered as a sportsperson. She submitted that if she was given weightage as a Sportsperson, then her merit will be higher. 5. Her representation was declined on July 25, 1989, by the University vide Annexure P-6. She has filed this writ challenging the rejection of her application and claiming that she is entitled to be considered for BDS Course along with MBBS Course and she is entitled to claim weightage as a Sportsperson. 6. In the written statement, the respondents pleaded that Clause 4 of Chapter V appearing at page 13 of the prospectus provides :- "There will be a common merit list for MBBS and BDS Course. Candidate will be admitted in order of merit and preference given in the application form and subject to the availability of seat(s) for the individual Course. Option once exercised shall not be allowed to be changed or withdrawn, subsequently." 7. According to the admission form of the petitioner, she exercised her option only for MBBS Course and, therefore, she is not entitled to change or withdraw her option exercised by her. 8. Qua the weightage to be given to her as a sportsperson, it was pleaded that she had not claimed any weightage for being a Sportswoman as she had specifically mentioned `No' against column No. 9 of her application form and thus it is clear that she exercised her option for MBBS Course and did not claim any weightage at the time of submitting her application form. The rules do not permit any change at the subsequent stage. 9. In addition, it was pleaded that even on facts she if not entitled to any weightage as a Sportsperson because the relevant provision of the prospectus in this regard as under :- "No seats are reserved for candidates who have distinguished themselves in sports. However, such candidates who are otherwise eligible for admission to MBBS/BDS Entrance Examination on the basis of marks secured in the qualifying exam. will be given upto 5% weightage on a graded scale as given below for participation in sports/athletics during and after Part II of the Higher Secondary/Prep and the Pre-Medical Class as per recommendations of the Medical Council of India...." 10. Since she has participated in the sports activities while studying in 9th Class at School level, she has not entitled for any weightage on that score. Further not making any claim for such weightage in her application form shows that she was well aware of the fact for non-entitlement of the same. The respondents have claimed that the rules do not allow any change of option. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be considered for BDS Course and she having not claimed any weightage as a Sportsperson and not entitled to any weightage on merits, she could not be given any weightage on that account. 11. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at great length. 12. Mr. H.L. Sibal, Sr. Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners, has argued that no doubt the petitioner had not filled up the form properly qua her option for MBBS/BDS, but if she is entitled to admission on merits, she may not be declined admission on hypertechnical ground. 13. Mr. Sibal has further argued that the weightage as a Sportsperson fixed by the University in the prospectus is discriminatory and is hit by Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and no person can be debarred of the weightage only on the ground that she or he had not got a merit certificate in the 12th or higher class. A person who is a Sportsman and participated in the qualifying tournaments even in junior class is to be given weightage and such discrimination has been held by Hon'ble the Supreme Court to be hit by Constitution of India. He has cited a number of judgments in support of his contention. 14. Mr. J.L. Gupta, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for respondent No. 1, has submitted that the applicants are bound by the prospectus and the forms filled by them. The prospectus clearly provides that only those persons will be given benefit of the sports activities who have qualified for such a weightage in Part II of the Higher Secondary/Prep and the Pre-medical Class, as per recommendation of Medical Counsel of India. As the petitioner had exercised her option for admission to only MBBS Course, so she cannot be considered for admission to BDS Course and as she had not claimed any weightage as a Sportsperson and she otherwise does not qualify for any such weightage, she could not be given any weightage as a Sportsperson. 15. I have considered the arguments carefully and gone through the relevant papers. 16. The petitioner, in her application form while applying for the test had filled the form only for MBBS. The form, a copy of which is Annexure RI/I, shows that a candidate should indicate by writing one or two or three or four in the box provided below, his/her preference for the course. In case, a candidate does not indicate his preference he/she will be considered under category 3 below. Category 3 provides `MBBS first otherwise BDS'. The petitioner did not write one, or two or three or four in the box provided, but only wrote `1'. According to prospectus, if one or two is not mentioned then it may be presumed that she is applying for MBBS. In this situation it cannot be said that her choice was MBBS only. Her case will be covered by that clause dealing with the situation where a candidate does not indicate her preference and she is to be considered for category 3 i.e. MBBS first otherwise BDS. No doubt, she had said in column No. 5, MBBS only and for BDSNA (Not Applicable). The entries in Column No. 5 are subject to entries in the earlier columns. She being a young girl, not well versed in the filling up of the forms, might not have carefully read the form and realised that there is a contradiction between her filling up of the earlier entries and entry No. 5. Anyway, in such a situation, the interpretation favourable to her is to be taken and it can safely be presumed that she desired admission in MBBS first otherwise BDS. It is held that she will be entitled to admission to BDS if she is entitled to the same in order of merit. Some entries in the filling up of form by her which may convey her intention to the contrary will not be used against her for debarring her admission to the BDS course. 17. As far as her claim as a sportsperson is concerned, she is positively said in her form that she is not claiming any weightage as a sportswoman. When she has not claimed any weightage as a sportsperson, she could not be considered for admission in that category and no weightage can be given to her. Her argument that she had applied to the concerned authorities with the Gradation Certificate awarded by the Director, Sports, Chandigarh to be considered as a sportsperson will not be of any help to her, because in her form she had taken a definite stand that she is not claiming any weightage as sportsperson and it is clearly provided in the prospectus that option once exercised shall not be allowed to be changed or withdrawn subsequently. In this situation, when she has clearly refused to take any weightage as a sportsperson in her application form, she cannot be allowed to claim the same subsequently when she finds that in the general category she is not getting admission on merit. The prospectus of the University are for the guidance of the candidates and they are binding on the University. When it is clearly provided in the prospectus that option once exercised shall not be allowed or withdrawn subsequently, the University could not allow the petitioner to change her category and claim benefit as a sportsperson. There is nothing wrong in the order of the University in not giving her any weightage as a sportsperson for admission to MBBS/BDS Course. The argument of Mr. Sibal that the criteria fixed for giving weightage to sports person is discriminatory and against the provisions of law is not of any relevance, as the correctness or the legality of the criteria could only be gone into if the petitioner had claimed any benefit as a sportsperson. In that situation, if the University had declined, then it could be considered whether declining of the weightage is justified or not and whether the criteria fixed by the University is discriminatory or not. In this case, she has not claimed any weightage initially at the time of the filling up of the form and the prospectus does not entitle her to change the option subsequently. All these arguments making the criteria discriminatory are besides the point. 18. Consequently, the writ petition of the petitioner is allowed in so far as it relates her option for MBBS/BDS Course. The respondents are directed to consider her candidature for BDS course irrespective of some contradictory entries made by her in the application form for appearing the examination. She will be admitted in BDS course if on merit she deserves to be admitted. 19. So far as her claim as a sportsperson is concerned, the respondents are justified in declining the same as she had clearly stated in her application form that she does not claim any weightage as sportsperson and she cannot subsequently be allowed to change her option and claim weightage as a sportsperson. With these observations, this writ petition is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition partly allowed.