MUKESH R.SHAH,J. - (1.) I.A. No. 6852 of 2018 Present interlocutory application has been preferred by the original writ petitioner, Respondent No. 3 in Letters Patent Appeal, for an appropriate interim order permitting/allowing the students of the Respondent No. 3 institution to appear in the examination of 1st year of B.Ed.programme of 2 years, academic session 2017-18, scheduled to be held from 07.09.2018 as per the programme of B.Ed.1st year examination 2018 vide examination ID No. 185102, dated 02.08.2018 for the academic session 2017- 19 or, alternatively, to extend the date of the aforesaid examination, to be conducted by the University, of the students of the petitioner college. It is also prayed to vacate the ad interim order dated 15.05.2018 passed in the main Letters Patent Appeal.
(2.) We have heard Sri Bindhyachal Singh, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 3, original writ petitioner, and Sri Lalit Kishore, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the appellant University and another.
(3.) At the outset, it is required to be noted that as such the Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the University and by the Respondent No. 3. The Letters Patent Appeal preferred by the Respondent No. 3, who has filed the interlocutory application, is reported to be dismissed for non-prosecution. Apart from the fact that whether in an appeal preferred by the original Respondent University, the question is as to whether the Respondent in the appeal can pray for and/or get any substantive relief or not, we have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents before us on merits.;