The court emphasized the need for proper legal recourse and highlighted the lack of essential facilities and recognition for the medical college in dismissing the appeal.

D.N. Patel, J.

This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 12.05.2016, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(s). No. 2180 of 2016, whereby direction was given by the learned Single Judge to prefer representation before the competent authority, i.e., the Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh and the matter was directed to be decided by the Vice Chancellor in accordance with law, as one more candidate is also claiming to be the Principal of Singhbum Homeopathic Medical College & Hospital, East Singhbhum.

2. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to entertain this letters patent appeal mainly for the following facts and reasons:—

(i). This letters patent appeal has been preferred against the observation of the learned Single Judge in paragraph no. 5 of the order dated 12.05.2016, passed in W.P.(s) No. 2180 of 2016 for the ready reference of paragraph no. 5 of the order passed by the learned Single Judge reads as under:—

“5. After hearing learned counsel for the respective parties, regard being had to the limited nature of grievances and without dwelling upon the merit of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of giving a liberty to the petitioner to approach/file a representation before the competent authority i.e. Vice-chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh through respondent no. 5 within a period of two weeks and on receipt of the same, the Vice-chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh shall consider the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of eight weeks thereafter, result thereof shall also be communicated to the petitioner with the aforesaid period, with the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.”

(Emphasis supplied)

(ii). In pursuance of the aforesaid observation and direction of the learned Single Judge, the Vice Chancellor of the Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh has now taken a decision on 11.06.2016 as submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent - University. This order has not been challenged in the writ petition and directly in this letters patent appeal an interlocutory application has been preferred challenging the said order passed by the Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh, (I.A. No. 3751 of 2016). This is not permissible in the eye of law. This appellant could have preferred writ petition if at all the appellant is aggrieved of the order passed by the Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh upon the representation of the original petitioner.

(iii). Moreover, it appears that the original petitioner as well as the present appellant are claiming the post of Principal of the aforesaid medical college;-

(a) which has no building;

(b) which has no laboratory;

(c) which has no equipments;

(d) which has no chemical in the laboratory;

(e) which has no students at all;

(f) which has no recognition of the Central Council for Homeopathy, New Delhi;

(g) which has no affiliation as on today by the Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh; and

(h) if at all this appeal is allowed, this appellant has nothing to do except getting salary!!

(iv). Such type of college is situated in the district of East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur and for the principalship of such type of college, litigations like, writ, letters patent appeal, etc., are going on.

3. We, therefore, dismiss this Letters Patent Appeal with a cost of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand), to be deposited by this appellant within eight weeks from today with the Advocates Association Welfare and Development Fund Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi.

4. Registrar General of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the President and Secretary of the Advocates' Association, Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi.

5. In view of the final order passed in the Letters Patent Appeal, I.A. Nos. 3751 of 2016, 8355 of 201