WR\ IT PET!T!GN Nairqgs . .. 2 PET!T!Q :1- 5 l‘nU RESPGNBENT DIN Secretary, G jgigagggu Enei‘ f‘rqr} boiiege, thrau Guru Qhasidas UnWersiiy, h LE. 225122.? 9F THE . EN §F iNi‘im t y a wa; daau’dgg Versus Bi!aspur throug Biiaspur (Ch‘ngar§1} . its Registrar, a"'s v? EI! PETHIQM UNDER ARTJG CGN$T§TUTI gh Frincipai and overning Bcdy, Eiiaspur, Tehsii and Eisirici: _ Bigaepur {Shhaétisgarh} W W m 53 W1 20M, ............................ . ................ ma .......................... ’ ...................... WhWi§f§érm $Wm mam ERMTW 14-8-2002 Shli Prashant Mishra, CO1msel for the petitioner. Shri Manindra Shn'vasta‘ Ghasidas University, Bilaspur, noiice. Heard. The grievancc of the writ pm of the respondent— Unive‘ taking any decision on its appli from holding the election of t attention is invited to paraglap been averred that representat University along with reminder whereof is Annexure P~2 6r, P- 1a, Standing counsel for the Guru is present in Court, asked to take petitioner is to the inaction on the rsity and ‘its functionaries in not cation for exempting the institution he students’ union. The Court’s h 5.8 of the petition wherein it has ions had been submitted to the on 17-8-2001 r36 30-8-2001, copies 3 to the writ petition but neither those representations have been considered nor the representation dated 09-04—2002, Accordingl} to the University and its fun decision on the petitioner’s exempting the institution trom union. In View of the limited grit petitioner, the Court is of the 61: be served in keeping the Wn disposed of at the admission 3cision on the representations of Maw avanoe and the prayer made by the inion that no useful purpose would t petition pending, as it can bet University to take appropriate di stage by directing the respondent- ‘, the main prayer is for a direction otionaries to take an appropriate application — representations for holding the election of students’ XI-HC-22 WWW e. WK W Wm W €> \ws5kgz‘ W290 W 33; ‘ 331m Ewmw r2.— WVhWWftwtm %afran3n%$ the petitioner or reference which was made by the petitioner for exempting it from holding eletiion of students’ union. clear that the Court is; not exl the petitioner contention and direction to take a decision th its own merits and in accorda field considering that the elec September 2002. Ordered acct Consequently, stand disposed of. In View of the above, writ petition stands/disposed of. M.W.P.N0.622/2002 63 I.A.No‘4781/2002, It is made messing any opinion on the merits of this order is not to be construed as ‘ereon. A decision has\to be taken on ace with the regulation governing the (ions are to be held in the month of u‘dingly. ’i Sd/— \ r E P.C-Naik Judge [his W mg