IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6815 of 2010 1. Sanjay Kumar S/O Sri Lal Babu Singh R/O Vill.- Desari, P.S.- Desari, Distt.- Vaishali Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Government, Patna 3. The Secretary, Higher Education Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna 4. The Vice Chancellor Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 5. The Registrar Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 6. Principal In-Charge Birchand Patel Smarak College, Desari, Distt.- Vaishali 7. Sri Satish Chandra Patel, Secretary Governing Body, B.P.S. College, Deshari, Distt.- Vaishali 8. Branch Manager Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Branch Deshari, Distt.- Vaishali 9. Sri Deo Charan Singh S/O Late Bhikha Singh R/O Vill.- Gajepur, P.S.- Deshari, Distt.- Vaishali 10. Jai Kishore Prasad Singh S/O Late Ram Lakhan Singh R/O Village & P.O.- Uphroll, Distt.- Vaishali ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Adv. For the State:- Mrs. Anju Jha, Adv. For the B.R.A. Bihar University:- Mr. Harendra Kumar Tiwary, Adv. --------------- 3. 26.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the B.R.A. Bihar University and for the State. The writ petition was filed on 20.4.2010 after serving two copies in the office of the Advocate General and also on the counsel for the University. The Court is not as much concerned with the quarrel going on between the individuals for the office bearership in the governing body of the Birchand Patel Smarak College, Desari at District-Vaishali affiliated to the University as much as the Court is concerned with 2 the consequence that it may have and appears to be having on the aspect of the higher education. An educational institution with such internecine quarrels can hardly provide an atmosphere best suited to development and growth of education. In so far as the dispute between the individuals in the college is concerned that is a matter to be agitated before the proper civil forum. The Court is only concerned with the actions of the University/State under Statutory powers in so far it may affect the functioning of the institution. The petitioner had originally questioned the appointment of respondent no. 7 as the Secretary of the Governing body on the ground that his term as University representative appointed by the University had expired. The contention therefore was that a person who was not a member of the Governing body of the college could not have been appointed as a Secretary of the governing body by the University. The Court need not go into those aspects of the matter as learned counsel for the University submits that he has received verbal instructions on his mobile No. 9420963405 from Shree Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, Law Officer of the University from the latters mobile No. 9430865657 on 26.9.2011 that by letter No. 3 B/2452 dated 25.7.2011 issued by the University, a new Governing body has been approved. Since the University has failed to assist the Court by filing a counter affidavit in time, the Court is left with no option but to confirm the submissions in the aforesaid manner by incorporation in the order sheet. Learned counsel for the petitioner raises the issue that if it be so, the question arises of the illegal acts that the Secretary may have done for during the period when his occupation of the office may not have been proper. Once the constitution of the governing body has changed, the grievance of the petitioner as presented stands redressed. The application has therefore become infructuous. The issue of any actions of the erstwhile Secretary, and the legality of the same are matters more appropriately to be examined by the new governing body, if it so desires. The larger issue for maintaining an academic environment for growth of higher education in context of the affiliation granted is left open for the respondents to their satisfaction. The application is disposed as infructuous. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)