Karnataka High Court
G. Krishnappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 May, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MAY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.39673 OF 2013 (LB - RES)
BETWEEN:
G. KRISHNAPPA,
S/O GURUVANNA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT NO.765/2-89, SRIRAM BADAVANE,
DAVANAGERE - 577 004.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.YOGESH V KOTEMATH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
M S BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT,
DAVANAGERE - 577 001.
3. DAVANAGERE CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
DAVANAGERE - 577 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
4. MANGALORE CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
MANGALORE - 575 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
2
5. BELGAUM CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
BELGAUM - 590 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
6. BELLARY CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
BELLARY - 583 101.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
7. GULBARGA CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
GULBARGA - 585 101.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
8. HUBLI - DHARWAD CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
HUBLI - 580 020.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
9. MYSORE CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
MYSORE - 570 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI.S.MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI.A.NIRANJAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
SRI.T.N.RAGHUPATHY, ADVOCATE FOR R6;
SMT.SUMANGALA GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R8;
SRI.MOHAN BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R9;
R4 AND R7 - SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ANNEXURE - C DATED 21.3.13 ISSUED BY R1 AUTHORITY;
DIRECT THE R1 TO ALLOT SC FOR THE OFFICE OF MAYOR OF
R3 BY WAY OF RESERVATION AS PER ROTATION POLICY
CONTEMPLATED U/A 243T [4] OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
AND AS PER GUIDELINES ISSUED BY R1 VIDE ANNEXURE - G
AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition has become infructuous.
2. The said submission is placed on record.
3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/-
JUDGE NR/-