OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER v. ANJARIA

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT MULTI-PURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (BY SRI. PRUTHVI WODEYAR, ADVOCATE) …APPELLANT Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka AND:

THE REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES HAVING OFFICE AT NO.1 ALI ASKAR ROAD VASANT NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 052

THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 146 8TH CROSS, 3RD MAIN ROAD MARGOSA ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU – 560 003 - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:45554-DB WA No. 1598 of 2024

SRI. K. DEEPAK S/O KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS WORKING AS COURT OFFICER HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA PRINCIPAL BENCH BENGALURU-01 …RESPONDENTS (SRI M.N. SUDEV HEGDE, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 SRI SAMEER SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR/ RESPONDENT No.3) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 01/07/2024 PASSED IN WP NO.16270/2024, BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HONBLE COURT AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) The writ petition came to be filed by the petitioner-respondent No.3 herein, wherein the prayer made was to direct respondent No.2-the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Bengaluru to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated

26.02.2024 made to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies- - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:45554-DB WA No. 1598 of 2024 respondent No.1 and to take consequential action against the office bearers of respondent No.3-Judicial Department Multipurpose Co-operative Society. A further direction was prayed for to restrain respondent No.3 from disbursing any amount or making any payment.

2. The writ petition came to be disposed of by learned Single Judge as per the order dated 01.07.2024, in terms of the following operative directions, regard “5. Having facts narrated hereinabove, this Court is of the considered opinion that the 2nd respondent-DRCS will have to take a decision as to whether an enquiry under Section 64 or 65 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, is required to be conducted in accordance with law on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner. For that purpose, the 2nd respondent-DRCS has been given sufficient opportunity. the 2nd respondent-DRCS

Nevertheless, six more weeks time is granted to a conclusion and submit a report to the Additional Registrar of Co-operative Societies.” to come

3. It is against the aforesaid order that the present appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 by the original respondent No.3-Judicial Department Multipurpose Co-operative Society. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:45554-DB WA No. 1598 of 2024

3.1 A bare reading of what is directed in paragraphs 5 and 6 above, show that respondent No.2-the Deputy Registrar was directed to take a decision as to whether an enquiry under Section 64 or 65 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 was required to be conducted on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner. Six weeks time was granted to respondent No.2 to come to a conclusion in that regard and submit a report to the Additional Registrar of Co-operative Societies.

When the appeal came up for consideration, learned advocate Mr.Sameer Sharma for respondent No.3 stated that the directions passed by learned Single Judge are already complied with. He referred to the proceedings of Civil Contempt Petition No.995 of 2024 and the record thereof which included the memo filed by the petitioner withdrawing the contempt petition on the ground that the order was complied with.

4.1 In the compliance affidavit which was produced for perusal of the Court, it was clearly stated by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies-respondent No.1 herein that a detailed enquiry report dated 31.08.2024 was already filed after conducting an enquiry. The report was produced on record of the contempt proceedings. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:45554-DB WA No. 1598 of 2024 It was further stated on behalf of respondent No.3 herein that a separate writ petition challenging the said report dated 31.08.2024 is also filed, which is slated to be posted for hearing tomorrow itself. Be that as it may.

When the directions of learned Single Judge are complied with, nothing would survive in this appeal and any questions which could be raised by the appellant would be in the realm of academics. It is trite principle that the Court would not go into the academic questions and pronounce on the same. Even otherwise, the kind and nature of the directions issued by learned Single Judge would hardly book consideration for appeal by the Court.

6. In any view, if the appellant has any issues to be urged on merits in the appeal, it cannot be decided in this appeal, as it having been rendered academic. All the questions are left open to be considered in appropriate future proceedings. Nothing is expressed on merits