Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri A Venkateshappa vs State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|23 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.12973 OF 2019 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
Sri.A.Venkateshappa S/o.Late Ananthappa, Aged 66 years, Residing at Housing Board Colony, T.R.Nagar, Challakere Town-572 522 Chitradurga District. … Petitioner (By Sri.Omkaresha, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka Represented by its Secretary Home Department Vidhana Soudha Bengaluru-560 001.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Enquiry Cell, CID, Bengaluru-560 001.
3. The Under Secretary to Government, Department of Education, (Pre-University Education), Karnataka Government Secretariat, M.S.Building, Bengaluru-560 001. … Respondents (By Sri.Vijay Kumar A Patil, AGA) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned notice dated 14.01.2016 issued by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure-D issued under Section 91 of Cr.P.C and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary hearing, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri. Omkaresha, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. Vijay Kumar A. Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has sought for the following relief:
“a) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated 14.01.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent vide Annexure-D issued under Section 91 of Cr.P.C.”
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in response to the Show Cause Notice dated 14.01.2016 issued by respondent No.2, the petitioner has already appeared before respondent No.2.
4. The aforesaid submission is taken on record.
5. In view of the aforesaid, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri A Venkateshappa vs State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
23 April, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe