IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.44592 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SHRI D V KRISHNA MURTHY S/O D A VENKATACHALA SASTRY, AGED 68 YEARS, R/O NO.105, VISHWAS RESIDENCY, 22ND "A" MAIN, RAGHAVENDRA LAYOUT, PADMANABHANAGARA, BENGALURU-560070. … PETITIONER (By MR. K SREEDHAR, ADV.) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA RERPESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT (MUZRAI), MS BUILDING, VIDHANA VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE ENDOWMENT COMMISSIONER IN KARNATAKA SRI MALAI MAHADESHWARA BHAVANA, 2ND FLOOR, ALUR VENKATA RAO ROAD, CHAMARAJAPET, BENGALURU-560018.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPURA – 562101.
4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER SHRI VIDURASWATHANARAYANA SWAMY TEMPLE, VIDURASWATHA, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK, CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT – 562101.
5. SHRI K G SREEDHARA S/O LATE GOVINDAPPA, AGED 48 YEARS, ARCHAKA, SHRI VIDURASWATHANARAYANA SWAMY TEMPLE, VIDURASWATHA, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK, CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT.
… RESPONDENTS (By MR. Y D HARSHA, AGA FOR R-1 TO 4 MR. M S BHAGWAT, ADV. FOR R-5) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO 4 TO HOLD ENQUIRY AGAINST THE R-5 IN THE LIGHT OF THE LETTER DTD 24.08.2016 OF THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT MAHARAJA SANSKRIT COLLEGE, MYSORE VIDE ANNX-F AND THEREAFTER TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AGAINST THE R-5 FOR HAVING OBTAINED FRAUDULENT CERTIFICATE IN PASSING AAGAMA PANDIT EXAM WITHOUT ATTENDING THE EXAMINATION AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.K.Sreedhar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri.Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Sri.M.S.Bhagwat, learned counsel for the respondent No.5.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the respondent No.5 submits that the petitioner has expired and therefore, no relief can be granted and no direction can be issued to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner.
4. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the legal representatives of the petitioner to take recourse to such remedy as may be available to them under the law.
5. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, the pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RV