IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 10919 of 2000 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- YAVARKANJ SEVA SAKAHARI MANDALI LTD Versus MANISH BHARDWAJ OR SUCCESSOR -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 10919 of 2000 MR SHIRISH JOSHI for Petitioner No. 1-24 MR PR ABICHANDANI, AGP for Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH Date of decision: 26/07/2001 ORAL JUDGEMENT Heard Mr Shirish Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr PR Abichandani, learned AGP for the respondents. 2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners had challenged the voters' list at Annexure "B" to the petition for elections to the managing committee of Deesa Taluka Sahakari Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd.. 3. The last date for filing the nomination papers was 19.10.2000. By interim order dated 19.10.2000 this Court issued Rule on the petition and observed that while the Court will not interfere with the election process, the petitioners may approach the Returning Officer and if a prayer is made for inclusion of names of the petitioners in the final voters' list, the authority may consider the same in accordance with law. When the petition has reached hearing today, Mr Shirish Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the elections have already been held. 4. In view of the above, it is obvious that the petition has become infructuous. The petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. (M.S. Shah, J.) sundar/-