Writ petition dismissed as infructuous following petitioners’ memo.

The petitioners challenged the final voters’ list dated 15 September 2026, issued by the Karnataka State Bar Council, and sought relief under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

At the preliminary hearing, petitioners’ counsel filed a memo stating that the petition had become infructuous and requesting its dismissal on that basis.

Whether the writ petition should be dismissed as infructuous following the petitioners’ memo.

The petition invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, which confer writ and supervisory jurisdiction on the High Court.

The Court did not discuss or apply any substantive statutory provision, precedent, or legal doctrine; it disposed of the petition in view of the petitioners’ memo.

The petitioners expressly represented that the petition had become infructuous and sought its dismissal.

The Court accepted that representation and made no determination on the merits of the challenge to the final voters’ list.

The Court directed that any pending interlocutory applications stand disposed of.