- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 17368 OF 2021 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI KOMARI GOWDA M K AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS S/O LATE KOMARI GOWDA R/A NO.37, SRI CHOWDESHWARI NILAYA, BEHIND SPM HIGH SCHOOL MARIYAPPANA PALYA JNANABHARATHI BANGALORE-560056 2. SRI. B. SUNDER RAJ AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, S/O LATE BHASKARACHAR R/AT NO.63, 1ST MAIN ROAD 7TH CROSS, ANANTHNAGAR BAPUJI NAGAR BANGALORE-560021 3. SRI. K.N. RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, S/O K.L. NANJAPPA GOWDA NO.324, 16TH CROSS, 23RD MAIN, 5TH STAGE J.P. NAGAR BANGALORE-560078 4. SRI. M. SUBRAMANI AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, S/O LATE MUNISWAMY R/A NO.7, 10TH CROSS, MANJUNATH NAGAR MAGADI ROAD, BANGALORE-560023 Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 5. SRI. P. RADHAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, S/O LATE V. PAPAIAH R/A NO.580, ITI LAYOUT, 3RD STAGE, 3RD CROSS, OPP: R R ARCH MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE-560039 6. SRI. G.N. RAMANNA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, S/O LATE NANJAIAH R/A NO.96, 3RD MAIN, SANJEEVININAGAR, MOODALAPALYA BANGALORE-560072 7. SRI. G. MOHAN AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, S/O S. GOVINDARAJ SALLARPURIA SATTVA DIVINITY FLAT NO.1002, TOWER NO.5, NAYANDAHALLI BANGALORE-560039 8. SRI. S. MALLESH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O LATE C. SIDDAGANGAIAH R/A NO.535, 8TH MAIN, KCHS LAYOUT, BHUVANESHWARINAGAR BANGALORE-560056 9. SMT. L. JAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, W/O CHANDRASHEKHAR P.C. NO.772, 9TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, 3RD STAGE BASAVESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE 10. SMT. JENNIFER AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS W/O RAMESH CALWIN H - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 NO.795, 5TH MAIN, RAGHAVENDRA BLOCK SRINAGAR BANGALORE-560050 11. SMT. GIRIJA VISHWANATH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, W/O VISHWANATH K.M. R/AT NO.4333, OPP. VIVEKANANDA PARK GIRINAGAR BANGALORE-560085 12. SMT. KAMALA H GHODKE AGE ABOUT 65 YEARS, W/O HARISHCHANDRA GHODKE NO.319, 6TH B CROSS, B M B R LAYOUT, BANASWADI BHUVANAGIRI BANGALORE-560043 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MAHESH KIRAN SHETTY S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES BANGALORE REGION SAHAKARA SOUDHA NO.146, 3RD FLOOR, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 8TH CROSS, MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE-560003 2. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (HOUSING AND MISCELLANEOUS) ALI ASKAR ROAD BANGALORE-560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.R. KHAMROZ KHAN, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2; - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 SRI. Y.S.HANUMANTHA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANTS ON IA NOS.1/24 AND 2/24) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN DISPUTE NO.JRB/DAVA/29- C/04/2019-20 DATED 21.06.2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioners have challenged an order dated 21.06.2021 (Annexure ‘A’) passed by the respondent No.1 in Case No.eÉDgï©/zÁªÁ/29-¹/04/2019-20, the order dated 22.06.2021 (Annexure ‘B’) bearing No.eÉDgï©/UÀȺÀ/D.ªÀÄA.gÀ/05/2021-22 and the order dated 12.07.2021 (Annexure ‘C’) bearing No.C¤(ªÀ&E)/r- 2/rJ¦/10/2021-22 passed by the respondent No.2. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 2. The petitioners claim to be the Directors of a Housing Co-operative Society. A suo motu inspection was conducted under Section 65 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short, ‘the Act, 1959’) and in the inspection, it was found that there were large scale irregularities and misappropriation of funds of the Society. The financial loss was assessed at Rs.4,59,69,000/-. Therefore, after passing the order under Section 69 of the Act, 1959, the properties of the then office bearers of the Society were attached. A new Committee of Management of the Society was formed in the year 2004, which took charge and filed an execution petition before the Assistant Registrar of Co- operative Societies to bring the properties attached for sale. The Society purportedly recovered some money in the process. Amongst the properties that were attached in surcharge proceedings, were the properties bearing Sy. Nos.52/3, 52/2, 79, 53 and 54/2 situate at Bethu village, Madikeri Taluk, measuring 16 acres 50 cents. The said properties though attached in surcharge proceedings were sold and mortgages were created on the said properties by the purchasers. Nonetheless, the Society brought the said properties for auction - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 which was challenged by the purchasers in W.P. No.39007/2014 and W.P Nos.39650-39654/2014. The said writ petitions were disposed off on 25.02.2015 in terms of which, the purchasers paid a sum of Rs.1,00,01,000/- and the attached properties were released. 3. The petitioners contend that the former President – Sri G. Subramanya, who lost the election, lodged a complaint based upon which, respondent No.1 initiated suo motu proceedings under Section 29C of the Act, 1959 which culminated on 21.06.2021, disqualifying the petitioners from becoming member of the respondent therein – Society or any other Society for a period of five years. The petitioners filed an appeal under Section 106 of the Act, 1959 and also filed an application for stay before the respondent No.2. It was brought to the notice of the respondent No.2 that the incumbent of the office of the respondent No.1 was suspended from service on 21.06.2021 and that he had passed the order under Section 29C of the Act, 1959 and had also passed an order dated 22.06.2021 appointing an Administrator. Respondent No.2 allegedly without assigning proper reasons, rejected the application for stay in terms of the order dated 12.07.2021. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 The petitioners are before this Court challenging the order dated 21.06.2021 passed by the respondent No.1 under Section 29C of the Act and the consequent order dated 22.06.2021 passed by the respondent No.1 appointing the Administrator. They have also challenged the order dated 12.07.2021 passed by the respondent No.2 rejecting the application for stay. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the officer manning the post of respondent No.1 was suspended on 21.06.2021 and therefore, he could not have passed the order under Section 29C of the Act, 1957 and he could not have passed an order on 22.06.2021 appointing the Administrator to the Society. He submits that though this was brought to the notice of the respondent No.2, the application filed for stay of the said orders passed by the respondent No.1 was not entertained by the respondent No.2. He submits that in similar circumstances, a coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.12384/2021 (disposed off on 01.09.2021), had noticed that the incumbent of the office of respondent No.1 even after being suspended from service had passed an order dated 21.06.2021, which was impugned in the said writ petition, and quashed the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 said order and imposed cost of Rs.5,00,000/- on the respondent No.7 therein. He, therefore, submits that respondent No.2 ought to have taken note of this and must have stayed the operation of the order dated 21.06.2021 passed by the respondent No.1 under Section 29C of the Act, 1959 as also the as well as the order dated 22.06.2021 passed by the respondent No.1 appointing Administrator to the Society. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand submitted that the respondent No.1, who after being satisfied that the petitioners had misappropriated a sum of Rs.23,74,00,000/- belonging to the Society had disqualified them under Section 29C of the Act, 1959. He submits that there is nothing on record to show that the officer occupying the post of respondent No.1 was served with the order of suspension before he passed the orders dated 21.06.2021 and 22.06.2021. Therefore, no mala fide could be attributed to the respondent No.1 in passing the impugned orders at Annexures ‘A’ and ‘B’ to the petition. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the official respondents. 7. The petitioners have placed on record a copy of the order dated 01.09.2021 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P No.12384/2021 where the challenge was to an order dated 21.06.2021 passed by Mr. Panduranga Garag, who was the then Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies. In the said order, there is a reference to the Government order dated 21.06.2021 placing Mr. Panduranga D. Garag under suspension. In the case on hand, the said Mr. D. Panduranga Garag, who was the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies had passed the order under Section 29C of the Act, 1959 on 21.06.2021 disqualifying the petitioners from becoming members of the respondent therein - Society or any other Society for a period of five years from the date of the order. This apart, the said Mr. D. Panduranga Garag had passed an order dated 22.06.2021 but had signed it the previous day i.e. on 21.06.2021. Therefore, respondent No.2 must have entertained the application of the petitioners for stay and must have suspended the effect of the orders dated 21.06.2021 and - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 22.06.2021 passed by the respondent No.1, until disposal of the appeal before him. This would have met the ends of justice. The cryptic rejection of the application filed by the petitioners for stay by the respondent No.2 was therefore unjustified. In that view of the matter, this writ petition deserves to be allowed and a suitable direction deserves to be issued to respondent No.2 to dispose of the appeal before him as expeditiously as possible. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed in part. The impugned order bearing No.C¤(ªÀ&E)/r-2/rJ¦/10/2021-22 dated 12.07.2021 (Annexure 'C') passed by the respondent No.2 is quashed. The application filed by the petitioners for stay of the order passed by the respondent No.1 dated 21.06.2021 (Annexure ‘A’) in Case No.eÉDgï©/zÁªÁ/29- ¹/04/2019-20 and the order dated 22.06.2021 (Annexure 'B') bearing No.eÉDgï©/UÀȺÀ/D.ªÀÄA.gÀ/05/2021-22 passed by the respondent No.1 are stayed until disposal of the appeal before the respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 is directed to consider and dispose of the appeal within a period of two - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29577 WP No. 17368 of 2021 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent No.2 shall consider the appeal and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE SMA / List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50