The High Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous because subsequent elections were held after the challenge was resolved in the election petition. The case relates to Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation elections.
The writ petition and pending miscellaneous petitions were dismissed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.20107 of 2008
Date: September 11, 2014
Between:
Kaki Govinda Reddy … Petitioner
And
1. Election Tribunal-cum-Principal . District Judge, Visakhapatnam & 8 others. … Respondents
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.20107 of 2008
O R D E R:
This writ petition was filed for a writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the Election Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam, in E.O.P.No.487 of 2007 along with I.A.Nos.93 and 269 of 2008 and its order dated 03.05.2008 and to quash the same.
2. The election petition was filed under the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, by the successful candidate of Ward No.59 for the election held to the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation on 19.02.2007. During pendency of the petition, I.A.No.93 of 2008 was filed by the first respondent, the unsuccessful candidate, to dismiss the petition, as the petition was not in proper form, since the petitioner challenged the election without complying with the mandatory deposit of Rs.1,000/- as security deposit. After filing of the said petition, the petitioner filed I.A.No.269 of 2008 on 05.02.2008 to permit him to deposit Rs.1,000/as security deposit. Both the applications were considered by the learned Judge and dismissed I.A.No.269 of 2008 and allowed
I.A.No.93 of 2008. Consequently, the election petition stood dismissed.
3. Since the main election petition relates to the elections of the year 2007 and subsequently elections were held, the writ petition has become infructuous.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed in consequence. No costs.
________________________________ A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J Date: September 11, 2014 BSB 86 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.20107 of 2008
Date: September 11, 2014
BSB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of an order dismissing an election petition should be allowed when subsequent elections have been held.
Kaki Govinda Reddy
Election Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam
A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
