Karnataka High Court
H Vittal Shetty vs Mandarthi Co Operative Society Ltd on 24 September, 2020
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO.7754 OF 2020 (CS-RES)
BETWEEN:
H VITTAL SHETTY,
S/O MUDDANNA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
HEGGUNJE VILLAGE,
POST MANDARTHI - 576223,
BRAHMAVARA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K.CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MANDARTHI CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,
HEGGUNJE VILLAGE,
POST MANDARTHI - 576 223,
BRAHMAVARA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT.
BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
2. H GANGADHAR SHETTY,
S/O HIRIYANNA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
HEGGUNJE VILLAGE,
NEAR BANDAR TEMPLE POST,
MANDARTHI - 576 223,
BRAHMAVARA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT.
2
3. GOPALA MARAKALA,
S/O BACHCHA MARAKALA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
NADUR VILLAGE ALIYA,
POST NADUR - 576 223,
BRAHMAVARA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT.
4. C SAMBU SHETTY,
S/O LATE KRISHNAYYA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
SHEDI KODLU,
HEGGUNJE VILLAGE,
POST MANDARTHI - 576 223,
BRAHMAVARA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT.
5. K SHAMBU SHANKAR RAO,
S/O LATE MANJUNATH RAO,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
KALLU DEVASTHANA,
HEGGUNJE VILLAGE,
POST MANDARTHI - 576 223,
BRAHMAVARA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT.
6. CHANDRA PRATHIMA M J.,
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
KUNDAPURA - 576 201,
UDUPI DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.CHANDRASHEKAR ACHAR, ADVOCATE
FOR R1 & R3;
R2 AND R4 TO R6 ARE SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE NOTIFICATION DATED 24.02.2020
3
CALLING FOR THE APPLICATIONS FOR THE APPOINTMENT
OF VACANT POSTS IN THE SOCIETY (ANNEXURE - E) AND
ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri. K.Chandranath Ariga, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. K.Chandrashekar Achar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 3 appears through video conference. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition be dismissed as withdrawn.
The submission of both the learned counsel is placed on record.
Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
Sd/-
JUDGE SMJ