IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 1249 of 2010 IN CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO.16992 of 2008 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.7718 of 2010 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 1249 of 2010 ========================================= 1. Lalan Kumar S/O Sri Bishwanath Singh R/O Mohalla- Kolhua Paigambarpur, Road No.4, P.S.- Kanti, Distt.- Muzaffarpur And Secretary, Lok Jagriti Sansthan, Maripur, Muzaffarpur ………. Appellant Versus 1. The Vice-Chancellor Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 2. The Registrar Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 3. The Member Secretary, Implementation And Monitoring Committee For Vocational Courses Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 4. The Principal, L.S. College, Muzaffarpur 5. The Principal, M.P. Sinha Science College, Muzaffarpur ……………. Respondents ============================================ APPEARANCE For the Appellant: Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Advocate Mr. Dhirendra Kr. Jha, Advocate Mr. K.C. Jha, Advocate For the Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr. Amber Nath Banerjee, Advocate CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 14/9/2010 Heard the learned advocates This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent arises out of the judgment and order dated 30th June 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in the above CWJC. No.16992 of 2008. The appellant – writ petitioner had entered into a 2 Memorandum of Understanding with the respondent Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur (hereinafter referred to as “the University”) to conduct coaching/vocational course of Computer Science in a Constituent College of the University. On the expiry of the said Memorandum of Understanding a fresh Memorandum of Understanding was entered by the concerned Principal and the third one also. The third one has been rescinded by the unilateral action of the respondent University. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed the above CWJC. No.16992 of 2008 under Article 226 of the Constitution to enforce the Memorandum of Understanding or in the alternative to enforce one of the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding which enlists compensation of Rs.1crore 40 lacs. The learned Single Judge has held that neither the Memorandum of Understanding nor any of its terms can be enforced in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The appellant may seek relief before the Civil Court. We agree with the view of the learned Single Judge. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. Interlocutory Application No.718 of 2010 stands disposed of. Neyaz/ ( R. M. Doshit,CJ.) (Jyoti Saran, J.)