High Court Karnataka High Court

Suresh Veerayya Swamy vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 July, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Suresh Veerayya Swamy vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 July, 2008
Author: N.K.Patil
IN THE H18!-'I COURT OF KARNATAKA
CSRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA

msrreo was THE 191'" army or JULY, zeos {  I

BEFORE:

THE Hem-3L5 MR. Justice. MK, 4pA,%TiL *<~%'ifj  %
W.P.N0. 31335 of 2oo4%(L:a-REs} % f 

BETWEEN:

SURESH VEERAYYA SWAMY SIQ%.'E':§RAWA 8'*NA§AY,_ V .. 

COUNCELLOR  _ .
"roww MUNSUPAL coumcu. 
BAS#WAKALYANA     
RIAT SHAPUFE 'C-.:'Aa.:..; BA!SAVAi{fi;i_'{AN.A--_
axaaaasswx" * "    

AGED ABOUT 35 vEAz=zs__  3    _

PETITIGNER

(SR3. A. Né\{§}5xRAJARP§§VAD'a§:§§G;°;'TE)

AND:

«I
1.-.

TAR"-E5 OF  REP. BY %TS SECRETARY

SEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT

 V' " --s<p.R;s;AT.¢;a:r5z«:a*vLRAMBEBKAR VEEDH! BANGALOREJ

" *  $ASAVfi%.KALYAi\£A BSDAR EMST.

' »._'Vi"HE TA§4é--§Lt$AR
'RAE-AVAKALYAN AND RETURNING on-'scam TO THE

EL.EC?10i\E OF PRESEDENT AND 'JKDE PRESIDENT
TO\t'!?»f MUNICZPAUTY

 __"" '(sré:;.M.KuMAR, AGA FGR RESPGNDENTSE AND 2;

 '§"HiS WRET PETETEON IS FELED UNDER ARTELES 226 AND 22?' SF
.. Fl-EE CONSTETUTEON {BF ENDEA, PRAYSNG TO: QUASH THE. NOTEFICATEQN
DATED 12.?.206é ZN éJB§:S1:¥'~A§.R:2004{P-2}
N05 {BF BAS:%Vfi;KALYAI\§A TCDWN MU¥'~£¥C!F'AL CQEJNCEL AT ANNEXUREE

ESSUEC} BY FIRES? RESPONDENT AND ETC.

RESPONDENTS

$94 $5 FF RELATES TE} HEM



THES WRET PETWION C€)Mii§%' ON FOR HEAFHNG THE DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOi_.i_OW§NG:'

:ORDER:

The petitioner, questioning

notification dated 12.7.2oo4 bearing

2oo4 (P-22) issued by first reepo%jdeVnt;’~in’ :i’tii=..§91e:.it

reiates to item No.5 of Bef3eyakeiyan’av_’i*.o\iii.n””Mu:nicipe’ii’

Council at Annexure.-3B, hoe’ ioreeented this writ petition.
Further, petitioner haietio :iiJxa:s;h”‘Fgnnexure–C dated

2.8.2004″ iwbea Ké8’ei::PuSaAaChu:CR: 1 8:04-O5

issued %V2″”‘ also sought for a direction

decfigaringii’ tha:iiiRgiia1’3–A (Rotation of Offices) of the

i ii itiemegaxa.’Mumcipamses (President and Vice President)

‘E_ieotV:’ion.v”V__V{.if’%inendment)RuIes 2oo1 issued by first

reepo’ndent vide Annexure-A is iiiegai and void in so far

* as petitioner is concerned.

2. I have heard leamed counsel appearing for

H petitioner and iearned Additionai Government Advocate

appearing for respondents-1 and 2.

A

g!

.3-

3. Learned Additional Government Advocate

appearing for respondents»-‘i and 2, at..__ii1€2.:”iI”oi:tset

submitted that, the prayers sought for

petition do not survive for oonsideira’£i.on_T.

his submission, he submitted that;._in’-Viewoiziisining,

any interim order from thisviviiciouri, has been
conducted and is functioning and
therefore, the writ petitioii. filed may be disposed

of.

4. ‘isTheiik%iiisosnji:ésion made by learned Additionai

. Government Ad_§ooar§”3§péaring for respondents-1 and 2 as

staiediosuprai-isipiiaced on record.

wriiviooiitios fiied by petitioner is dismissed as

: vh_avii:1i_j:”i1vscoiné infructuous, in so far as Prayers-A and B are

¢onco,i’rieci:’ in so far as Prayer-C is concerned, it is open for

.. tho ostiiioner to redress his grievance as and when it requires,

ii orii so advised. Ordered accordingiy.

Sd/–

Judge

i:3n*