IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.35357 OF 2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI. KANNAPIRAN S/O VEERASWAMY AGED 49 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF M/S TWINS ADS HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.4 L,B, SASTRINAGAR 7TH CROSS INDIRANAGAR 2ND STAGE BANGALORE-560038. … PETITIONER (By Mr. R. CHANNAKESHAVA, ADV. FOR MR. N. SURESHA, ADV.) AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE (ADVERTISEMENT SECTION) N.R. SQARE BANGALORE – 560002.
2. JOINT COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE (ADVERTISEMENT SECTION) MAYO HALL BANGALORE. … RESPONDENTS (By Mr. SREENIDHI V. ADV. FOR R1 & R2 ) - - -
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct respondents to renew the license for electronic advertisement board as per Annexure-D Dtd.05.10.2015 and etc.
This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.R.Channakeshava, learned counsel for Sri.N.Suresha, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Sreenidhi V., learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2. Mr.R.Channakeshava, learned counsel appears vice Mr.N.Suresha, learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the learned counsel for the petitioner is a differently abled person and is not able to attend the Court and submits that this petition be taken up next week. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has invited the attention of this Court to the relief claimed in the petition and has submitted that the writ petition has been rendered infructuous by efflux of time as the renewal in respect of the license granted was only for a period of one year and the aforesaid period has expired on 04.10.2016. Therefore, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition.
3. Ordinarily, I would have exceeded to the request made on behalf of the petitioner. However, in the peculiar fact situation of the case, I am not inclined to do so, as nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition. It is evident from the relief clause (a) itself in the petition which reads as under:
“(a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or direction or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents to renew the license for electronic advertisement board as per Annexure-D dated 05.10.2015.”
4. The renewal of license for the electronic advertisement board is made on yearly basis. The aforesaid period has come to an end on 04.10.2016. Therefore, the relief claimed in the petition has become infructuous by efflux of time.
In the result, the petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE RV