HIGR COURT OF 'ua. Jmcmw Ar J3ALPU AR Wat Petltlon Nu ] [96 n~Af~AA4W__ A PETIIINER:_ O Subhash Ram aged 40 years son‘of bhri K.mRam, employee of ‘ Jv Madhya praeles‘h Electrieity‘aoaza. ‘ mlaspur B/o [21.1.6 37, Arya Colony, hfara BuaSpur M F‘ A -Versuse'. wowams l; Arya Gran Mrm‘agz sahakam, $a’miti ; 1 Q :garyadit‘,‘ rifra Eilaspur MAS“ ' me Election cfimex, VArya'Grah barman Sahakaii Samiti Tifra‘ , Bilaspu‘ P,, 1 The Regi strar, > peraive egiee P . , p a1 u ' Dy.‘ Rgi ra, e str ‘-rav e. asu I . pErITIQN u/Ar.22g OF IHEQMSHTUTIGNOF mam ‘ t \ ‘ . " D O THE Apm awns F * puuom ‘ l Partlculas f te petltmner' ‘\ o o 2. artlcma cf the respcadtsr Prs en No1 to 4 as glven 1n euse titlepabove . a ‘ / r o h Full name,age descnptlon place f , resldente 1s glven in cause t;tle, abve.‘ 4 v $ r M. Co—ot S ws , . V Bm Coopetxe socxetls . Bilpr n? l ‘ ‘ ' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATVBILASPUR WRIT PETITION No. 951 of 1996 Subhash Ram. VERSUS Arya Grah Nirman Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Bilaspur & Others. PETITIONER RESPONDENTS FETITION U/Art. 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’bie Shri Satish K. Agni'hotri, J. Fresem: Shri Sourabh Shanna, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent No. 1. Shri Shasahank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/ Respondent No. 2 zmd 3. . ORDER ORAL (Passed on 18 day of October, 2010) 1. The petitioner questions legality and validity of the order dated 19.02.1996 (Annexure N6), whereby he was disqualified for a period of 12 months from being a voter and lixrther, to contest the election. The period of 12 months for which the petitioner was declared disqualified, as aforestated, has already come to an end and the issue in this petition has become academic. Thus, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition. U). Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become / Sdl ‘\\ SaeshK-wom r Judge infructuous. Amit 1 , l I“ aJi ‘ r v wx: :v N, W, {mm e . W»