- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54740 WP No. 38769 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 38769 OF 2025 (GM-KSR) BETWEEN: 1. ARALIMARADADODDI HAALU UTHPADAKARA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, ARALIMARADADODDI, KOOTAGAL HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT- 562159 REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI M. S. SHASHIDARA, S/O. SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, IT IS THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 7 OF SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1959 2. SRI MAHALINGAIAH, S/O. VISHAKANTHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, VICE PRESIDENT OF ARALIMARADADODDI HAALU UTHPADAKARA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, ARALIMARADADODDI, KOOTAGAL HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT- 562159 3. SRI CHANDREGOWDA, S/O. LATE SUBBEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, 4. SRI SHIVAPPA, S/O. LATE DODDALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54740 WP No. 38769 of 2025 5. SRI CHANDRAIAH, S/O LATE VEERABHADRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 6. SRI PUTTASWAMAIH, S/O. LATE DODDALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 7. SMT. SHASHIKALA, W/O. DEVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 8. SMT. PADMAMMA W/O. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 8 ARE DIRECTORS OF ARALIMARADADODDI HAALU UTHPADAKARA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA. ARALIMARADADODDI, KOOTAGAL HOBLI. RAMANAGARA TALUK, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT- 562159 9. SRI DODDAVEERAIAH, S/O. LATE BAJJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, SECRETARY OF ARALIMARADADODDI HAALU UTHPADAKARA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, ARALIMARADADODDI, KOOTAGAL HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT- 562159 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SOMASHEKHARAIAH R.P.,ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54740 WP No. 38769 of 2025 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION OF SOCIETIES, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, NO.30, MALLESHWARAM BADAVANE, BEHIND MALLESHWARA TEMPLE, RAMANAGARA DIVISION, RAMANAGAR, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT- 562159 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, ZILLA SAHAKARI HAALU UTHPADAKARA SANGHAGALA OKKUTA NIYAMITHA, M. H. MARIGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 029 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ZILLA SAHAKARI HAALU UTHPADAKARA SANGHAGALA OKKUTA NIYAMITHA, RAMANAGAR DIVISION, RAMANAGAR, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT- 562159 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ISMAIL ZABIULLA, AAG) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 11.12.2025 IN NO. AR45/NONDANI/COLOUMN 12(5) /CR-403/2025-26 PASSED BY R2 UNDER ANNX-F AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54740 WP No. 38769 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Somashekharaiah R.P., learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ismail Zabiulla, learned Additional Advocate General and Smt. B.P.Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents. 2. The present petition is filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 11.12.2025 passed by respondent No.2-Registrar of Co-operative Societies. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners' is already an existing Society registered under Section 7 of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. 3. The impugned order is now giving permission to another society recommending the society to be registered within the same area and region where the petitioners-society is operating, which according to learned counsel is contrary to the provisions of the Act and the rules, so also petitioner has not been heard while providing such recommendation to an other society. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54740 WP No. 38769 of 2025 4. Per contra, learned AAG Sri Ismail Zabiulla appearing for respondents-authorities contends that the present petition is not maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 106 of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 as there is an alternative efficacious remedy available to the petitioners, aggrieved by the order passed by the Registrar under Section 12 of the Act. Therefore, he contends that the petition would not be maintainable before this Court when there is already an alternative remedy available to the petitioner, invoking the provisions of Article 226 of Constitution of India is not sustainable. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AAG for respondents, I am in agreement with Additional Advocate General that the order in question is passed under Section 12 of the Act, which is amenable to the appeal provision under Section 106 of the Act. Therefore, when there is an alternative efficacious remedy available to the petitioner, he cannot invoke the extraordinary jurisdictional Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, this petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, I pass the following: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54740 WP No. 38769 of 2025 ORDER (i) Writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. (ii) In view of the liberty sought for by learned counsel for the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority to invoke all grounds that are urged before this Court to seek remedy available in law. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16