IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 975 of 1989 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements? No 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No J 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement? No 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? No 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? No -------------------------------------------------------------- NATVERLAL P PATEL Versus DISTRICT REGISTRAR COOP SOC -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR AMAR MITHANI for Petitioner MR PG DESAI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE Date of decision: 24/02/98 ORAL JUDGEMENT Heard Learned Advocate Shri Amar Mithani for the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged validity of order dated 20.1.1989 passed by the District Registrar, Co-operative Societies (City), Ahmedabad, whereby the petitioner was removed from the post of Director of the Vijay Co-operative Bank Ltd. under provisions of sec. 76B of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner was elected as a Director of the said bank on 25.3.1985 and he was to hold the said post for a period of 4 years. Ld. Advocate Shri Mithani appearing for the petitioner has fairly submitted that the period for which the petitioner was appointed as a director has already come to an end. In the circumstances, the present petition has become infructuous. Looking to the facts of the case and especially in view of the fact that the tenure for which the petitioner was to function as a director of the Vijay Co-operative Bank Ltd. has already come to an end and as removal of the petitioner as director is not going to adversely affect him in future, the petition deserves to be dismissed. In the result, the petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. --------