IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6578 of 2003 1. Mithilesh Kumar Yadav, Son of late Ramdhani Yadav, Resident at Khutaha Dhavan, Near Hindustan Times Parbatti, Bhagalpur, District Bhagalpur. 2. Anandi Mandal, Son of Shri Shyam Mandal, Resident at Nasarat Khani, Post Champanagar, District Bhagalpur. 3. Palakdhari Mandal, Son of late Kamaldhari Mandal, Resident at Nasarat Khani, Post Champanagar, Distt. Bhagalpur. 4. Nawal Kishore, Son of Shri Jamuna Prasad Arya, Resident at Nasarat Khani, Post Champanagar, District Bhagalpur. 5. Adhik Yadav, Son of late Biro Yadav, Resident of Nathnagar, Pasi Tola, Post Champanagar, District Bhagalpur. 6. Anirudh Yadav, Son of late Satyanarayan Yadav, Resident at Sahebganj, Post Champanagar, District Bhagalpur. ---------- Petitioners Versus 1. Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur through its Registrar, District Bhagalpur. 2. The Vice-Chancellor, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur, District Bhagalpur. 3. The Registrar, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, District Bhagalpur. ----------- Respondents ----------- 8 23.08.2010 Heard Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ashok Kumar Keshri, learned counsel for the Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University. The prayer of the petitioners in this writ application reads as follows:- “1. That this is an application for issuance of appropriate writ(s)/ direction(s) for quashing the order no. 32/2003 issued vide memo no. B/5324-5641 dated 25/26-01-2003 and order no. 33/2003 issued vide memo no. B-5981-82 dated 25/26.01.2003 and further order No. 171/2003 contained in memo no. B/21098-99 dated 5th June 2003 and order no. 2 172/2003 contained in memo no. B/21100-458 dated 05.06.2003 issued by Registrar of Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, whereby and whereunder the petitioners name have been removed from service from the post of Class-III and Class IV and further for direction to respondents to reinstate petitioners in service with all service benefits, and to make payments of arrears of salary with Bank Interest Rate.” Admittedly, the four orders challenged in this writ application no longer exist, inasmuch as, even those four orders of regularization of service of concerned persons covered by them had been interfered and set aside by the Chancellor of the University and, thereafter, the University has sought to regularize 365 persons by a fresh order dated 27.5.2006. The subsequent order of regularization passed by the University on 27.5.2006 has not been assailed in this writ application and therefore when the relief for which originally this writ application was filed no longer survives, the resultant issue of any anomaly in refusing regularization of the service of the petitioners can now only 3 be decided if the petitioners can successfully assail the order of regularization passed on 27.5.2006. Thus while this Court would hold this writ application to have become infructuous, it will, however, leave it open for the petitioners to assail the said order dated 27.5.2006 in a fresh proceeding, inasmuch as, the same has come into existence only during pendency of this writ application. With the aforesaid observations and liberty, this application is dismissed as having become infructuous. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)