The High Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, holding that no useful purpose would be served by issuing fresh notices or a writ since the Managing Committee's term was ending in May 2011.
Petition dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
wp2530.08
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 2530 OF 2008
Prakash s/o Dadarao Koli .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS
Mr. A.S. Bayas, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.P. More, AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 5.
=====
CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE : 3rd MARCH, 2011.
PER COURT :
2 The main prayer in the writ petition reads thus :
A To direct respondent nos. 1 to 5 to forthwith initiate and complete an enquiry in to the qualification of respondent nos. 7 to 20 to hold the office of Director and to become member of respondent no. 6 Federal Society and to take action in accordance with law, by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction.
wp2530.08
2
3 This court is informed that the term of the Managing Committee of respondent no. 6 will be getting over in May 2011. In this petition, the contesting respondents, namely respondent nos. 7 to 14, are not served till this date. Notices were issued in April 2008. Then the petition was placed before the court only once i.e. on 24-7-2008. Thereafter the petition is coming before this court today, for the first time. Keeping all this in view, we are satisfied that no useful purpose will be served by issuing fresh notices to the contesting respondents. With the passage of time, in our opinion, this petition has become infructuous. Hence the petition is dismissed. However, this shall not preclude the petitioner from raising objections, if respondent nos. 7 to 14 decide to contest the next election of respondent no. 6 - society.
All the contentions of the petitioner in respect thereof are kept open.
( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE
( D.B. BHOSALE ) JUDGE
dyb
Prakash s/o Dadarao Koli
The State of Maharashtra
D. B. Bhosale
R. M. Borde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
