IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.32604/2018 (GM – KSR) BETWEEN:
1. COSMOPOLITAN SPORTS AND CULTURAL ASSOCIATION CHIKKAHONNENAHALLI LINK ROAD, HASSAN. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.
2. COSMOPOLITAN SPORTS AND CULTURAL ASSOCIATION, CHIKKAHONNENAHALLI LINK ROAD, HASSAN. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (BY SRI. DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF CO- OPERATION, M S BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES/ DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES HASSAN HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 201.
...PETITIONERS 3. DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES/ DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES HASSAN HASSAN DISTRICT.
APPOINTED AS ADMINISTRATOR COSMOPOLITAN SPORTS AND CULTURAL ASSOCIATION, HASSAN – 573 201.
4. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (I & M) OFFICE OF REGISTRAR OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD, BENGALURU – 01.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.T.VASANTH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4; SRI. V.SHIVAREDDY, HCGP FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER ANNEXURE – M DATED 05.07.2018 IN PASSED BY THE R-1 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE – M AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri.Devi Prasad Shetty, learned Counsel for the petitioners.
Sri.H.T.Vasantha Kumar, learned Counsel for the respondents No.2 to 4.
Sri.V.Shivareddy, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this writ petition, petitioners, inter alia, have assailed the validity of the order dated 5.07.2018 by which an Administrator was appointed to maintain the affairs of the petitioner No.1-Society.
3. A Bench of this Court by an ad-interim order 31.07.2018 had stayed the operation of the order dated 5.07.2018. Admittedly, during the pendency of the petition, the tenure of the Administrator has come to an end on 4.01.2019.
4. In view of the above, nothing further survives for consideration in this petition.
5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he be granted liberty to approach the Court again in case the respondents appoint an Administrator in future.
6. Needless to state that no such liberty in law is required and if the respondents appoint any Administrator, it would be a fresh cause of action for the petitioners to take recourse to law available as such.
With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ln.