High Court Karnataka High Court

Ningawwa W/O Bheemaraya vs State Of Karnataka on 7 July, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Ningawwa W/O Bheemaraya vs State Of Karnataka on 7 July, 2008
Author: N.K.Patil
.1-

IN THE met-1 coum os KARNATAKA.  5    % 

CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA  

mrrso ms was 7*" DAY'(5F'J15l¢':*_.'A20_§'8:'    

:BEFQRE:   V % _
me Hotame MR. msvlcs  l'i.K.    %
W.P.N0. 33472 _a:;é'a;a2:s-R+e'§;%%%  % 
BEIWEEN:   I   
SMT. NiNGA'v".'3.'VA V

WIO BHEEMARAYA 3:: ¥E_Aiaf;$.
occ: coax, R50 CHEEWEER

SHORI?~F4'U'R..TA-Li.;. :;.s_;_:L.s_Az:g;;ao;..'oi§¢,;fr  
               

(SR1, SAGAR PA";f§L, At§vc?,:_AT£ 'A3,é§PP§EA;§':Ne A3533 wrm SR3. ASHOK
PA'E'%L Aovocmay, 1. . u     ' --

awn: V V _

1  .. THE  err KARNAIAKA

_ ' 'FE.EP,i:':Y TH:E,CH%.EF SECf?E'fi'~fZY
V V vscwswn SGUSHABANGALORE

 2 '1TH;é..IHA3sLD.§%1Aai SRQRAPUR

SHQRABUR TALUK;,GULBARGA DIST.

V " THE SECRETAWGRAMA PANCHAYAT

' V Vcnemmua SHQRAPUR TALUK, GULBARGA D351".

, 4': "  =$MT; DURCSAMMA wro SHARNAPPA

 " « .C;4ENN;.aR SHORAPUR TALUK
_  GABVJLSARGA [}l$T.

RESPONDENTS

‘ j “:;sR{ ‘M. KUMAR ASA FOR RESPONDENTS4 AND 2
~ . _ ‘RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 SERVED)

TE-J38 WRiT’PE-“FITION £8 FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CQNSTSTUTSON QF INDIA, PRAYSNG TO: QUASH ANNEXURE-D
PASSED BY R2 AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO APPOENT THE

PETITIONER TO THE POST OF AS535-TANT COOK AS PER THE EARLIER
SELECTKDN. _

THIS WRIT PETFFION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY, HVE9§F'{!NG
IN ‘8’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWNG: p . A4

zdfl-L

in the instant case, petitionar is w

_cor:’ectness of the impugned cdmmuaicatidnt

July 2002 hearing No. E» 2 ‘.

by the second respondent_..u:’vEda_,_ Annexur;e5E, has

preserzstadv _–“wFurttaer, petitioner has
sought fa; respondents ta appoint the

petittpner as per earlier seiection.

2:.’t:A..Ejv:’vAt:aVve heard teamed counsel appearing for

1’pafitidn’ét’V”.’and.;;”iaamed Additional Government Advocate

V app§a.rinp respondents~1 and 2.

Learned counsei appearing for petitioner Sri.

‘ Saagar Patil appearing along with Sri. Ashok Patti, at me

». outset submitted that, the instant writ petition filed by

petitioner may be dismissed as having become

infructuous, on the ground that, the rmuest made by

/L

if

-3-
petitioner is for appointment as assistant cook fsixiihs

reievant year and that perisd has already expirséigisii ”

4. The submission made by

appearing fer petition as .1′

record. V

5. The instant writ finetifvéioner is
dismissed as having at the risk of

learned cougssi fab: ivyjertzitisiner. Ordered

Sd/-~
Judge