THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.924 of 2016
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. Tarun G. Reddy, learned counsel for the
appellant.
2. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated
19.09.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing
W.P.No.31463 of 2016 filed by respondent No.1 to
represent State of Telangana in the National championships and sports events for Taekwondo to be held from 22.09.2016 to 25.09.2016 at Anandpur Sahib, Punjab.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that though the appellant was respondent No.4 in the writ petition, appellant was not served. On the face of it, order of learned Single Judge may appear to have become infructuous, nonetheless, the issue still remains regarding 2 selection of team by the appellant or by respondent No.1 in future.
4. Insofar the first submission is concerned, in paragraph 2 of the order dated 19.09.2016 learned Single Judge recorded that writ petitioner was directed to serve the respondents by way of personal notice. Apart from personal notice, writ petitioner had sent e-mail on 17.09.2016 at 5:20 pm to respondent No.2 and the other respondents. However, none appeared on their behalf.
5. Insofar the second submission is concerned, we are of the view that we need not enter into such contentious issue inasmuch as the selection was made for an event which took place between 22.09.2016 to 25.09.2016.
6. Though on the point of notice not being served on the appellant, appellate Court had suspended the order of the learned Single Judge vide order dated 27.09.2016, we are of the view that at this distant point of time, no useful purpose would be served by adjudicating on selection of athletes for an event which took place in September, 2016. 3 The issue as to whether it is the appellant or respondent No.1 who can select athletes to represent the State of Telangana in the National Championships is kept open to be considered in an appropriate case.
7. Subject to the above, writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 12.09.2022 vs