- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44535 WP No. 18757 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA WRIT PETITION NO. 18757 OF 2022 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. ITI HOUSE BUILDING CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, DOORAVANINAGARA BENGALURU 560016, BY ITS PRESIDENT 2. ITI HOUSE BUILDING CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, DOORVANINAGARA BENGALURU 560016 BY ITS SECRETARY, (BOTH THE PETITIONER SOCIETY IS REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1959) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO OPERATION M S BUILDING, BENGALURU 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (H AND M), NO.1 ALI ASKER ROAD, BENGALURU 560001 3. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BENGALURU REGION 8TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BENGALURU 560003 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.R. KHAMROZ KHAN, AGA) Digitally signed by PRASHANTH N V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44535 WP No. 18757 of 2022 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMUNICATION DTD.23.8.2022 IN JRB/GRUH/DHU/A/63/2022-23 ISSUED BY THE R-3 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-F AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioners being the President and Secretary of ITI House Building Co-operative Society Ltd, have approached this Court seeking issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the communication dated 23.08.2022 in JRB/GRUH/DHU/A/63/2022-23 issued by respondent No.3, produced as per Annexure-F. 2. Heard Sri. Devi Prasad Shetty, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. SR. Khamroz Khan, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. Perused the materials on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that Annexure-F was issued directing initiation of criminal - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44535 WP No. 18757 of 2022 prosecution against the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Society under Section 109 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 for not holding the election for the post of two Directors who have died on 06.05.2021 and 08.05.2021 respectively. Therefore, Annexure-F was issued for initiating criminal action. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the election for the Board was already held in the year 2024 and therefore, no criminal action would be initiated. Secondly, it is his contention that no sanction is obtained and the petitioners were not called upon to show cause before issuance of Annexure-F and therefore, the petition is liable to be allowed. 4. Per contra, it is the contention of learned Additional Government Advocate that, even if the election was held in the year 2024, the lapse committed by the CEO of the Society is not curable. Admittedly, death of two Directors was not reported nor the election was held as contemplated under law. Therefore, respondent No.3 is directed to initiate criminal proceedings. There is a procedure to be followed for initiation of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44535 WP No. 18757 of 2022 criminal proceedings. That stage has not yet come. Under such circumstances, the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: "Whether the petitioners have made out any grounds to allow the petition?" My answer to the above point is in the 'Negative' for the following: 6. It is stated that the election for the Society was held in the year 2024. Thereafter, the death of two Directors was not reported and the election as required under law was not held. Annexure-F is only a direction by respondent No.3 to initiate criminal action against the CEO of the Society. The said CEO has not challenged Annexure-F. But on the other hand, the petitioners being the President and Secretary of the Society have challenging it, who are not aggrieved parties. 7. Section 111 of the Act, 1959 deals with cognizance of offences and the sanction is necessary for the learned - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44535 WP No. 18757 of 2022 Magistrate to take cognizance of the offences. Under Section 111(3) of the Act, 1959 an opportunity is to be given to the person concerned before according sanction. The petitioners have rushed to the Court by filing the writ petition without any reason and the CEO has not chosen challenge Annexure-F. Admittedly, no application for according sanction was filed pursuant to Annexure-F. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petition is liable to be dismissed. Hence, I answer the above point in the Negative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition is dismissed. SD/- (M G UMA) JUDGE PNV CT:VS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10