- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3348 WP No. 34278 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 34278 OF 2024 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: + MRS ANITHA JESUMAN D/O JOHN JESUMAN AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT VISHAL VILLA, KARKERA COMPOUND, BOLAR, MANGALORE - 575001. AND ALSO R/AT 22-13-1627/8, MARIYAMMA GUDI STREET BOLAR, MANGALORE - 575001 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SACHIN B S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CENTRAL ARECANUT AND COCOA MARKETING AND PROCESSING CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED A MULTI-STATE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE SITUATED AT VARANSHI TOWERS, MISSION STREET, MANGALORE - 575001, D K DISTRICT, REGISTERED UNDER THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT 1956 REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, ALI ASKAR ROAD, BANGALORE - 560052 Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3348 WP No. 34278 of 2024 REGISTERED UNDER THE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT 1956. REP BY ITS REGISTRAR …RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI K RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SHRI SIDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA FOR R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 07.08.2024 IN NO. RCS/DIS/MSCS/D1/01/2024- 25 PASSED BY THE R-2 AS PER ANNX-A PASSED BY THE R-2 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNX-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The petitioner has called in question the order dated 07.08.2024 passed by the second respondent-Registrar of Co-operative Societies by which, Arbitrator was appointed to decide the claim of the first respondent(hereinafter referred to as “Society”). - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3348 WP No. 34278 of 2024 2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner was an employee of the society, which is the registered under the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act (for short, the Act) was constituted in the year 1973. The petitioner while in the position of Deputy General Manager, on certain allegations of misconduct, charges were framed, the Society initiated disciplinary proceedings, charge-sheet cum notice was issued, disciplinary enquiry was held. The enquiry report was submitted, the petitioner was held guilty of the charges and dismissed from service by the order of the first respondent on 06.03.2024 with a direction to the petitioner to make good loss to the Society to the tune of Rs.1,08,74,286/-. 3. Against the said order, the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority came to be dismissed. The Society issued notice on 01.07.2024 intimating the petitioner regarding the forfeiture of the gratuity amount and calling upon the petitioner to pay the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3348 WP No. 34278 of 2024 amount due to the society in light of the order passed by first respondent. The first respondent-Society, invoking the provisions of the Act, filed a petition with a direction to the petitioner to pay the amount of Rs.84,23,966/- with interest before the Registrar of Co-operative Societies- second respondent, who invoking Section 84(1) of the Act, appointed the Arbitrator to decide the claim petition filed by the Society vide order dated 07.08.2024. The petitioner appeared before the Arbitrator, upon which arbitration proceedings were proceeded. The petitioner filed an application-I.A No V under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of the Civil Procedure of Code read with Section 84(1) and (2) of the Act seeking for rejection of the claim petition as barred by law. The application was heard and the Arbitrator by an order dated 13.12.2024 rejected the application filed by the petitioner assigning various reasons. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3348 WP No. 34278 of 2024 4. When the facts stood thus, the petitioner now before this Court has sought to challenge the order passed by the second respondent appointing the Arbitrator to decide the claim petition filed by the Society. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent and perused the materials on record. 6. Main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner in addition to various other contentions is that the impugned order passed by the Registrar appointing the Arbitrator to decide the claim by the society is without jurisdiction, as the claim made by the society is with respect to dispute regarding the disciplinary action taken by the society which is an exception to file a dispute under Section 84 of the Act. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3348 WP No. 34278 of 2024 7. The counsel for respondent- society, reiterating the statement of objections filed, submits that the writ petition is not maintainable and operates as res judicata, as the petitioner after having participated in the proceedings in the Arbitration Case No.1/2024 had suffered an order on I.A No.V filed by the petitioner now cannot contend that the appointment of the Arbitrator itself is bad under law. 8. The Registrar, by the order dated 07.08.2024 under Section 84(1) of the Act, appointed the Arbitrator to decide the claim petition filed by the Society. The petitioner appeared, contested before the Arbitrator and also filed an application-I.A No.V seeking rejection of the claim petition as barred by law. The order passed on the said application is not in challenge and has attained finality. Now, after the petitioner having suffered an order of rejection of her contention similar to that which is raised before this Court, if the contention of the petitioner is - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:3348 WP No. 34278 of 2024 accepted, it amounts to setting aside the order passed by the Arbitrator on I.A No.V, which has attained finality. This being the position, this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition and this Court pass the following: ORDER The Writ Petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. Sd/- ________________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA DH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24