- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14847 WP No. 1053 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 1053 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SHYAMA KUMARA R, S/O RAJASHEKHARAPPA P, AGE 41 YEARS, OCCN: TEACHER IN SMT. INDIRA GANDHI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL (S T), BALENAHALLI, R/O CHALLAKERE - 577 522, TQ: CHALLAKERE, DIST: CHITRADURGA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHESH KIRAN SHETTY S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR THE KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY, NO. 8, M.S.B-1, 6TH AND 7TH FLOOR, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU - 52. 2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR (EDUCATION AND ADMINISTRATION) THE KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY, NO. 8, M.S.B-1, 6TH AND 7TH FLOOR, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU - 52. 3. THE DISTRICT OFFICER DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER (ST) Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14847 WP No. 1053 of 2025 CHITRADURGA - 577 501, DIST: CHITRADURGA. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, SMT. INDIRA GANDHI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL (ST), BALENAHALLI - 577 522 TQ: CHALLEKERE, DIST: CHITRADURGA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SRINIVASA C, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; R3 AND R4 - SERVED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. KREIS/ENQR/DISP/119/2024-ADMN/E-143093 DATED 23.12.2024 PASSED BY THE R-1 (ANNX-J) AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 23.12.2024, passed by respondent No.1 vide Annexure-J, by which he has been suspended from service. When the petition was listed for orders, it is stated by the learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2 that the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14847 WP No. 1053 of 2025 impugned order of suspension of the petitioner is revoked and a charge memo is already issued to the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid, the petition has become infructuous. Consequently, the petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. It is, however, open for the petitioner to challenge any other orders passed by respondents No.1 and 2 in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25 CT: BHK