Sri.Mahesh M.Hiremath v. The Addl.Director General of Police, Civil Rights Enforcement Directorate, No.1, Palace Road
Case at a glance
- Bench
- DILIP B BHOSALE
Outcome
Disposed of
petition is disposed of as rendered infructuous
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. His statement is accepted. In view thereof, nothing further survives in the writ petition. Hence, petition is disposed of as rendered infructuous. This order however shall not preclude respondent No.3 from taking appropriate remedy against the caste validity certificate issued by the scrutiny committee…
Judgment
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE WRIT PETITION No.44786/2012(GM-POLICE) …Petitioner Between: Sri. Mahesh M.Hiremath s/o Mahantayya Hiremath Age 57 years, Occ: Chief Engineer, Karnataka Rural Road, Development Agency, (RD & PR Dept.) Dr.Raj Kumar Road, Rajajinagar, Bangalore-10. (By Sri. Krishna S.Dixit, Adv.) And: 1) The Addl. Director General of Police, Civil Rights Enforcement Directorate, No.1, Palace Road, Bangalore-1. 2) The Superintendent of Police, Civil Rights Enforcement Cell, Belgaum Region, Belgaum-590016. 3) V.Bhaskar Red Arrow s/o Virachar, Age 64 years, r/at No.1355/30, 9th main road, Hampinagar, RPC Layout, Vijayanagara II Stage, Bangalore-40. …Respondents (By Sri.C.Jagadish, Spl.GA for R1 & R2) 2 This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order dated 27.09.12 at Annexure-K passed by R-1 with costs. This petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following:- PC: Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, makes a statement that within a period of one week from today, they shall withdraw the memo/letter dated 27.09.12 which is impugned in the present writ petition.
Operative part
His statement is accepted. In view thereof, nothing further survives in the writ petition. Hence, petition is disposed of as rendered infructuous. This order however shall not preclude respondent No.3 from taking appropriate remedy against the caste validity certificate issued by the scrutiny committee (Annexure-E1). All contentions on merits are kept open. 3 It is also made clear that I have not examined merits of the case. Learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 undertakes to communicate this order to respondent No.3 within a period of one week from today. Sd/- JUDGE Srl.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is disposed of as rendered infructuous
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.