IN THE HIGH COURT KARNATAKA AT BANG,%%1;ORE
1:>A'1*E1:> '"i'HIS THE 22ND DAY OF JAN'iJ12%;I{§fl"__
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE '
WRIT PETYPION NO; _:959'z.1?2007 kA
BETWEEN :
(By .'_S.'G.f{;;$BAL3;§I{;§i§'Pi AND Sri.
SR1 MQHAMMEQ f ~
S/O MAHABOOB_SAB..*
AGED ABOUT 42V3:€:ARs'.} '
occ B_USI'NES,S,_, .
R/o;iM1%iN, :1'<:?,z:+:oss,
'1'iP:PU [NA'GAR, 'I.--'I_;AR'IH'AR ¢1'IRE(L§T "'I'H_?3._ 'EQEREH. RESPONDENT TO DECLARE
THE PE'If1TI,ONER.AN ELECTED CANDIDATE TO
THE. ELECTIONVHELD TO THE PQST OF' COUNSELOR
GE R5; E
A ' v'I'I;}fVI,'>"'V.'*&?V&}"}2I'1' PE'm':0N COMING ON FOR ORDERS
'I"1friIS,.__i)AY; 'THE COURT MADE 'i'§:'[E FOLLC3WING:-
ORDER
The relief sought for by the petitioner a for writ of
Ci110-WaJE’i’aI1tO to direct the respondents 3 and 4 not :0
allow the first re$p0nde12t to continue in the ofic
,3-
fifth respondent as a Counselor and to direct the fourth
respondent to declare the petitioner as an _e§ected
candidate.
2. I have heard 2
Counsel appearing for the A’ 3
3. The prayer “for ‘ Tfniseonstrued.
However, the Line prayer sought
for by him ‘to question the
election the ground of
fm*11isi”1ing of -dee3a1’at1’on.V-
_ 4. V’ .. in V::iew o_f alternative remedy availabie to
tIie”:~pe-iitionef’in’—~£:ei’ms of Section :21 of the Karnata}<a
Act, 1964, there is no gonna made out
this petition. The petition being
miscioneeived, accordingly rejected by ixnpoeixisg cost of
'Re;.1,000/ – payabie to the I'egistI"y.,
pi?-