IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO. 39302 OF 2014 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
MR. ASHISH GADRE, S/O MR. MAHADEV P GADRE, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, WORKING AT M/S. ALLIED METALLURGICAL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED 201/3, 12TH MAIN, 3RD PHASE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BANGALORE-560058.
… PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANUP RAJ FOR SRI. ANAND MUTTALLI, ADV.) AND:
1. CENTRAL BEAURAU OF INVESTTIGATION PLOT NO. 53, 10TH FLOOR, B-WING, CGO COMPLEX, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM MARG, NEW DELHI-110 003.
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, ACB BRNCH, VII/2, KARMIK BHAWAN, PO-ISM DHANBAD- 826 001.
JHARKHAND.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. BHAVYA K. FOR SRI. P. PRASANNA KUMAR , ADV.) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CHANGE THE PLACE OF ENQUIRY AS REGARDS THE PETITIONER PURSUANT TO NOTICE DTD.7.8.2014 ISSUED BY THE R-2 (ANNEX-A) TO BANGALORE CITY AND FURTHER DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER TO APPEAR BEFORE THE R-2 OR SUCH OTHER OFFICER AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DIRECT, BY ISSUING A WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Anup Raj for Mr.Anand Muttalli, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Smt.Bhavya K. for Mr.P.Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to change the place of enquiry.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was issued a notice by respondent No.2 on 07.08.2014 to appear before the respondent No.2. It is further submitted that petitioner appeared and petitioner requested to change the place of enquiry but his request was rejected arbitrarily. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court and this petition is pending since 2014, in which no interim order has been passed. By now the enquiry initiated on 07.08.2014 must have been concluded. Therefore, prima facie nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition. However, the same is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner that in case the grievance of the petitioner still subsists he shall be at liberty to seek revival of this petition.
With the aforesaid liberty, petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS