Sri.H.K.Puttaswamy Gowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 November, 2020

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri.H.K.Puttaswamy Gowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 November, 2020

Bench: S.G.Pandit

                           1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

                        BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

WRIT PETITION NOS.14668-14669 OF 2016 (CS - EL/M)

BETWEEN

1.    Sri.H.K.Puttaswamy Gowda,
      S/O Late Karigowda,
      Aged about 62 Years
      President of Milk Producers
      Co-Operative Society Ltd.,
      Manuganahalli Village,
      Periyapatna Taluk,
      Mysuru District.

2.    Sri. Shivanna,
      S/o Appaji Gowda,
      Aged about 42 years,
      R/o Manuganahalli Village,
      Periyapatna Taluk,
      Mysuru District.
                                           ...Petitioners
(By Sri.Chandrakanth R Goulay, Advocate)

AND

1.    The State of Karnataka,
      By its Secretary,
      Department of Co-Operation,
      M S Building, Bengaluru - 560 001.

2.    The Returning Officer,
                            2



     Manuganahalli Milk Producers
     Co-Operative Society Ltd.,
     Manuganahalli,Periyapatna Taluk,
     Mysuru District - 571 107.

3.   The District Election Officer &
     Assistant Registrar
     Of Co-Operative Societies,
     Mysore District, Mysore - 571 107.

4.   The Assistant Registrar of Societies,
     Hunsur Sub- Division, Hunsur,
     Mysore District - 571 107.

5.   Manuganahalli Milk Producers
     Co-Operative Society Ltd.,
     Manuganahalli,
     Periyapatna Taluk,
     Mysuru District - 571 107.
     Represented by its Secretary
     Sri Prakash.
                                          ... Respondents

(By Smt.Jyothi Bhat, HCGP for R1 and R4;
    R2, R3 and R5 served)

      These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 &
227 of the Constitution of India, praying to declare that
the Calendar of Events as per Annexure - D and also
Process of Conducting Election to the Society is
Arbitrary, Illegal and Void and in Violation of Principles
of Procedure for Conducting Election.

      These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary
Hearing in 'B' Group, through video conference, this
day, the Court made the following:
                               3



                                ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that in view of the subsequent development, writ petition would not survive for consideration, but the learned counsel seeks liberty to challenge the subsequent event, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same.

2. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is placed on record.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

4. It is needless to observe that, if the petitioner is aggrieved by any subsequent event, it is always open for the petitioner to challenge the same.

Sd/-

JUDGE ag

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court