Sukh Deo Tripathi & Anr vs State & Ors on 13 March, 2009

CW - 2971/95 Sukh Deo Tripathi & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.   Judgment dt.13.3.09

                                             1/2


           S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2971/1995
      Sukh Deo Tripathi & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Date of Order                            :               13th March, 2009
                                       PRESENT

             HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

Mr. Amit Dave for Mr. P.P. Choudhary for the petitioner.

Mr. I.S. Pareek ) for the respondents.
Mr. Rajesh Joshi )
                               ---------

1.              Learned counsel for the respondents have brought to the

notice of this Court annex.7 advertisement notifying the vacancies for

the post of Managers in the respondent Central Cooperative Bank

Ltd. Bikaner has since been withdrawn by the said respondent Bank

itself vide office order dated 31.8.1995 and, therefore, the challenge

to the said advertisement Annex.P/7 dated 24.8.1995 has become

infructuous.



2.              Learned counsel for the petitioner was also granted time

by this Court on 11.11.2008 and 11.12.2008 to inform the Court as to

whether the lis involved in the present writ petition still survives or

not and if the petitioners have already been regularised as Manager

with the respondent Bank the lis may not survive. However, no

additional affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners.



3.              By the order dt.11.12.2008 the respondents were also

directed to apprise this Court about the latest status of the petitioners
 CW - 2971/95 Sukh Deo Tripathi & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.   Judgment dt.13.3.09

                                            2/2


and Managing Director and Executive Officer of the respondent

Central Cooperative Bank, Bikaner were directed to appear before

this Court on 16.1.2009. They appeared in this Court and have filed

affidavit. Para 4 of the said affidavit which is common in both the

affidavits is reproduced hereinunder:-



                        "4. That by the present writ petition petitioners
                        have claiming regularization and the petitioners
                        are not employee of the answering respondent
                        Bank, as such the previous administration has
                        inadvertently not contested the said matter."



4.              Be that as it may since the impugned advertisement

Annex.7 datd 24.8.1995 itself has been withdrawn by the respondent

Bank as would be clear from the letter dated 12.8.1996 of the Dy.

Registrar (Legal) in the Cooperative Department, Jodhpur addressed

to their panel Advocate Shri Amrit Lal Dave, a photocopy of which is

taken on record.



5.              In the opinion of this Court, therefore, this writ petition

has become infructuous. Accordingly this writ petition is dismissed

as having become infructuous. No order as to costs.



                                                  [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J.

item No.8
babulal/-