today the date of poll has not been declared. Such being the situation, we are of the opinion that the petitioners should move the learned single Judge to expedite the hearing and disposal of the cases instead of prosecuting these appeals, which according to us have become infructuous on account of the aforesaid developments. It was submitted before us that the observations in the impugned order, more particularly in paragraphs 15 and 16 regarding the authority of the State Co-operative Election Commission to modify or tinker with the resolution adopted by the managing committee to hold elections would cause prejudice to the petitioners unless the said observations are vacated. The learned single Judge has in paragraph 25 of the impugned order, while declining interim relief, observed that the observations contained in impugned order are for the limited purpose of deciding the question of grant of interim relief. In the light of the said observation, we find no reason or justification to clarify that the observations are only for the purpose of the interim order. It is evident from the impugned order itself that the writ petitions will be disposed of untrammeled by the observations therein. These writ appeals are accordingly closed as infructuous. As stated earlier, the appellants or the respondents may move the learned single Judge for expeditious hearing and disposal of the writ petition. Though learned counsel appearing for the parties who have filed impleding petitions
