IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5848 of 2007 Shahid Shashi Prasad Singh College, Shambhuganj, Banka through its Principal (Degree Course) Shri Rakesh Ranjan Singh. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur through its Vice- Chancellor. 2. The Vice-Chancellor, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 3. The Examination Controller, T.M.B. University, Bhagalpur. 4. The Examination Department, T.M.B. University, Bhagalpur. 5. Shri Rajshree Singh, W/o Dr. Diwakar Prasad Singh, Resident of Agakhan Lane, Manodoja, Tolaghat, District Bhagalpur. 6. Shri Inderjit Kumar Singh, S/o late Nunumani Singh, Resident of At & Post Rangapatal, Navgai, Sagrampur, District Munger. --------- Respondents With CWJC No.11530 of 2007 Shahid Shashi Prasad Singh College, Shambhuganj, Banka, P.S. Banka, District Banka through its Principal Shri Rakesh Ranjan Singh. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur through its Vice- Chancellor. 2. The Vice-Chancellor, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 3. The Registrar, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 4. The Sub Divisional Office, Barh, Govt. Officer, Member of Governing Body of S.S.P.S. College, Shambhuganj, Banka. 5. Shri Birendra Kumar Singh, S/o not known to the petitioner, Zoology Department, Murarka College, Sultanganj, P.S. Sultanganj, District Banka. 6. Shri Surendra Prasad Singh, S/o not known to the petitioner, M.L.A. Amarpur, P.S. Amarpur, District Banka. 7. Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh, son of Dr. Diwakar Prasad Singh, Resident of Aga Khan Lane, Manroja, Gola Ghat, Bhagalpur. 8. Shri Inderjit Kumar Singh, son of Nunumani Singh, Resident of at & P.O. Ranga Patal, Naugai, Sagrampur, District Munger. -------- Respondents ----------- 2 10.11.2010 No one appears on behalf of the University. Counsel for the petitioner, in both the cases, would submit that due to 2 subsequent events, these two writ applications have become infructuous. Counsel for the respondent no.6 who has filed his counter affidavit in both the cases, has got no objection to such submission of the counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, both of the aforementioned writ applications are dismissed as having become infructuous. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)