JUDGMENT : D.N. PATEL, J. 1. This so-called Public Interest Litigation has been preferred with the following prayers: (a) For a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to provide the proper facility of education including proper classrooms, library, laboratory, playground, canteen, hostels for the students already admitted for the running sessions and also for the students who will get admission in the coming sessions. (b) For a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to complete the remaining construction of Central University of Jharkhand's new Building and Campus and in the meantime shift the present campus which is running on the lease to the newly constructed building of the university. (c) For a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent no. 3 to provide with the proper fund including fund under capital head to respondent no.4 for proper functioning of the university. (d) For any other writ, order, direction as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. 2. Having heard counsel for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this is not a Public Interest Litigation at all. Looking to the prayers of the petition, it appears that this petitioner is in search of better class room, better play ground, better canteen, better hostel etc. It also appears that this petitioner is seeking completion of remaining construction of the respondent-university. It also appears that this petitioner is seeking some fund from Resp. No. 3. It appears that there is no end of expectation of better class room, better play ground, better canteen, better hostel etc. 3. It ought to be kept in mind that whenever any university starts working newly, there are bound to be few teething problems. Everything cannot be glittering like gold or shining like a silver. One has to tolerate to the new university . The growth is always slow, especially those, who are newly constituted university or the educational bodies. 4. The fanciful idea of the student/petitioner cannot be appreciated in this writ petition. They might have studied in their graduation in some better colleges or universities, but, the respondent-university has emerged in the year 2009 and some construction activities are always going on, as per the availability of the fund. 4. The fanciful idea of the student/petitioner cannot be appreciated in this writ petition. They might have studied in their graduation in some better colleges or universities, but, the respondent-university has emerged in the year 2009 and some construction activities are always going on, as per the availability of the fund. We do not want to give any direction to the UGC to give fund, because, the grant of fund is a policy decision by the Central Government. Nonetheless, if the respondent-university is eligible, the fund shall be given by the concerned authorities. So far as construction activities is concerned, it is going on and it shall be completed, looking to the availability of the fund, the necessity of the building etc. 5. We are not inclined to give any of the directions, as prayed in the memo of this writ petition. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed.