IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.667 OF 2014 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI G.R.RAJENDRA PRASAD, S/O LATE HOTTE PAKSHA RANGASWAMY, AGED 43 YEARS, NO.3, SHANKAR NAGAR, 7TH MAIN ROAD, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BANGALORE-86.
... PETITIONER (By Sri. VISWANATH SABARAD, ADVOCATE(ABSENT) AND 1. THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER, NIRVACHAN SADAN, ASHOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 001.
2. SRI PRASANNA KUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O NANJUNDAPPA RANGASWAMY HOTTEPAKSHA, NO.34, RAJA RAM MOHAN ROY ROAD SAMPANGIRAMANAGAR, BANGALORE-560012.
ALSO AT:
A) NO.9, 2ND FLOOR, SUVARNA MANDIR 50 FT. ROAD, MUNESHWARA BLOCK BANGALORE-85 B) NO.29,1ST FLOOR, 3RD CROSS 1ST MAIN, RAMANJANEYA LAYOUT CHIKKALASANDRA BANGALORE-61 C) NO.77, 4TH CROSS, LIC COLONY JAYANAGAR, 3RD BLOCK EAST BANGALORE-11 D) C/O SRI V SRINIVASA ADVOCATE NO.88, 1ST FLOOR, S C ROAD SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20 E) NO.K-24, 1ST MAIN 2ND CROSS, KHB LAYOUT BSK 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE-85 3. SRI B S YEDDIYURAPPA PRESIDENT, 73 YEARS, KARNATAKA JANATHA PAKSHA NO.11, 12TH MAIN 16TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-55.
4. SRI V DHANANJAYA KUMAR, 60 YEARS, KARNATAKA JANATHA PAKSHA NO.11, 12TH MAIN, 16TH CROSS MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE-55.
... RESPONDENTS (By Sri : S R DODAWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1 Sri : SIDDHARTHA.H.M., ADVOCATE FOR R3 & C/R4 V/O DATED 29.07.2015 PETITION AGAINST R2 STANDS DISMISSED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.9.2013 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-N AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R None for the petitioner.
2. Sri S.R.Dodawad, learned counsel for Respondent No.1 and Sri Siddhartha.H.M., learned counsel for Respondent Nos.3 and 4.
3. None had appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 25.03.2019. There upon this Court had adjourned the case and had directed that in case appearance is not made on behalf of the petitioner on the next date of hearing, appropriate order shall be passed. Today also none has appeared on behalf of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the writ petition has been rendered infructuous on account of efflux of time.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as infructuous.
SD/- JUDGE DKB