Smt Geetha vs Asst Commissioner on 17 April, 2009

IN THE HIGH come'-r or KARNATAKA,  T' -

DATED TI-H8 THE 17TH nA,.Y"b'I4*    T_ 

BEFORE  » A
THE Homsm MR. aUs'r1%c::E"* nzcjuaié $255?
Way x=g__,1*1'r1or7w,'13,ixo.1o5*1é"%t1-3* "2907 fLB=Efi§]

BETWEEN

: SMT GEETHA     
W/O RAMEigH Hp---.LI   "  " 
AGED.ABQUT.'32'Y.EA'R.s   
ADHYAKSs_I-§"_A, N'I'f'F_UR_GRr%'M FEANCHAYAT
HMA.RAPA1~}AH;%;.I..Li  '  '--  .  
DAvANAr}.ERI:, _  _ --  PETITIONER.

(By Sri: R L«.pA*:*a1,'r§:.]:§ P£§?"iI;*'AND PATIL, ADVS.)

é_i'S...1.3_;_..

 '~  _ 1  €105/Ih}iISS'E'GNER

. 3 HARAPANAHALL:
_ " 'DA-VANAGERE

iz?  "NI'IfIfI;iV;%e._c§RAM PANCHAYAT
.. I~iA._RAPi§NAHALLI
DAWKNGERE

 .A ; _ REWI) BY ITS SECRETARY.  RESPONDENTS.

_”(–§3y–»s,{i. R. DEVADAS, AGA FOR R1)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FTLED UNDER ARTICLES

“£263 AND 227 OF THE CONS’}’lTUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
~ TO QUASH ‘THE NOTICE 01’. 16.6.2007 ISSUED BY R1

VIBE ANNEX.B. ‘TO ‘THE WRIT PETITION. ,.

2

THIS PETITION, COMING cm FOR PREL1’h1I’rx£Ai?Y

HEARING IN ‘E’ GROUP, THIS DAY THE COURT

FOLLOWING :

Learned counsel for vf.tu::_V pefitixfiler that

the relief sought for in i_s fendered
infructuous by pasVS;*;§t§¢.A ‘of the
submission, writ–§petitior1″iSl”d.iszx§is$éd “having become

i11fi’ucm0us.: ‘ ‘3