- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 20369 OF 2025 (CS-EL/M) BETWEEN: 1. MANU N.M. S/O MAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, SHARE NO. 103/15 2. CHOWDEGOWDA S/O BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, SHARE NO. 39/16 3. VEERBHADRAIAH S/O ERAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS SHARE NO. 2/15 4. H.R. HARISH S/O H.S. REVANNASWAMY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS SHARE NO. 9/11 PETITIONERS HEREIN ARE R/AT N. HALASAHALLI POST, MALAVALI TALUK - 571421 MANDYA DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRUTHVI WODEYAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, M.S.BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560001 Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY 3RD FLOOR, TTMC A BLOCK, K H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560027 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR MYSORE REGION, MYSORE - 570001. 4. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, AND ELECTION OFFICER TO PRIMARY CO-OPT SOCIETIES MANDYA SUB DIVISION, MANDYA - 571404 5. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES MANDYA SUB DIVISION, MANDYA - 571404 6. CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER KALAMMA TEMPLE ROAD, BUILDING NO. 168, 1ST FLOOR MALAVALLI - 571421 MANDYA DISTRICT. 7. NITTUR MULTIPURPOSE PRIMARY RURAL AGRICULTURE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. N. HALASAHALLI POST, MALAVALLI TALUK-571421 MANDYA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, (SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959) 8. NITTUR MULTIPURPOSE PRIMARY RURAL AGRICULTURE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. N. HALASAHALLI POST, MALAVALLI TALUK-571421 MANDYA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, (SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 9. THE RETURNING OFFICER, KANASAVADI MULTIPURPOSE PRIMARY RURAL AGRICULTURE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., N. HALASAHALLI POST, MALAVALLU TALUK-571421 MANDYA DISTRICT. 10. KUMAR S/O KALAIAH @ KONTAYYA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NITTUR VILLAGE, N.HALASAHALLI POST, HALGUR HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK-571421 MANDYA DISTRICT. 11. H.R.NAGABUSHAN, S/O H.K.REVANNA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MANDYA-571404 MANDYA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 6; SRI. SANDESH T.B., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.7 AND 8) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CALENDAR OF EVENTS DATED 26.06.2025 ISSUED BY THE 9TH RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-G. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner Nos.1 to 4 have challenged the calendar of events dated 26.06.2025 issued by the respondent No.9 to conduct the elections to the management committee of the respondent No.7. 2. (i) The petitioners claim that they are all members of the respondent No.7. They contend that the respondent No.10, who is a member of respondent No.7, was appointed as a Chief Executive Officer of respondent No.7, though he did not possess the requisite qualification as prescribed under Rule 17A of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 (henceforth referred to as 'Rules, 1960' for short). They contend that despite several requests, the authorities have not taken any action regarding appointment of a Chief Executive Officer of respondent No.7 and to replace respondent No.10. Since the respondent No.10 was illegally appointed as the Chief Executive Officer, the respondent No.4 had disqualified the board of directors, who challenged the same before this Court in W.P.No.41892-41898/2019. This Court allowed the writ petition in-part vide order dated 25.10.2019 and remitted the case back to the authority concerned for fresh - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 consideration. In the course of the order allowing the writ petition in-part, this Court observed that appointment of respondent No.10 is in violation of Rule 17A of Rules, 1960. (ii) The petitioners contend that there were several complaints lodged by the members of the respondent No.7 against respondent No.10 while he was working as a Clerk and that he had also unauthorisedly absented from work for two years. In that regard, the respondent No.6 had conducted a preliminary enquiry and submitted a report affirming the misappropriation and the unauthorized absence of respondent No.10 from duty. Despite such a report and a recommendation made by the respondent No.6, no action was taken by the Board against the respondent No.10. The Board of Directors of the respondent No.7 thereafter passed a resolution dated 03.12.2021 appointing the respondent No.10 as a Clerk on temporary basis and thereafter his appointment was made permanent vide resolution dated 13.03.2024 and he was appointed as an in-charge Chief Executive Officer vide resolution dated 25.06.2024. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 (iii) The petitioners contend that pursuant to the appointment of respondent No.10 as in-charge Chief Executive Officer, one of the members of the respondent No.7 lodged a complaint with the respondent No.2 regarding the illegal appointment of the respondent No.10 and that the respondent No.10 was acting according to his whims and fancies in preparing the voters list and was also making attempts to keep a large number of members away from participating in the upcoming elections and requested it to prepare the voters list by keeping the respondent No.10 away from the election process. The respondent No.2 vide its letter dated 20.01.2025 requested the respondent No.4 to look into the contents of the complaint and to take suitable action and also to report the action taken. (iv) The petitioner contends that since no action was taken by the respondent No.4 and no report was submitted by the respondent No.4, another letter dated 27.05.2025 was addressed by the respondent No.2 requesting the respondent No.3 to take suitable action. The respondent No.3 by his letter dated 02.07.2025 directed the respondent No.4 to hold an enquiry and to submit a report within 07 days. Despite the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 above, the respondent No.4 has failed to conduct an enquiry. However, the respondent No.10 without following the procedure prescribed under Rule 13-D of the Rules, 1960 had prepared the voters list. In the said list of eligible voters, the name of respondent No.10 is shown at Sl.No.29. Therefore, the petitioners contend that respondent No.10 is not only the in- charge Chief Executive Officer but also a member of the respondent No.7. They contend that the respondent No.4 without conducting an enquiry, in tandem with respondent No.9 had issued a calendar of events on 26.06.2025 fixing the date of election on 13.07.2025. 3. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contend that when the petitioners have made serious allegations against the respondent No.10 regarding preparation of voters list by him, it was incumbent upon the respondent No.4 to have conducted the enquiry. However, the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 have allowed the respondent No.10 to prepare the list of eligible voters of the respondent No.7 and had proceeded to conduct - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 elections to the managing committee. He therefore, contends that whole process of election falls foul of the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (henceforth referred to as 'Act, 1959' for short) and Rules, 1960 and therefore, the same is liable to be halted. 5. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate representing the official respondents contend that the petitioner No.3 is not a member of the respondent No.7 while, petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 4 were served with notice under Rule 13-D(2-A) of Rules 1960 and that they have not raised any objections regarding the illegal preparation of the voters list. He therefore, contends that petitioners cannot have any grievance against the conduct of elections. Insofar as the allegations of the petitioners against the respondent No.10, he contends that steps are already taken to recover the amounts misappropriated by him, when he was working as a clerk at the respondent No.7. He also contends that the elections to the respondent No.7 is already underway and the petitioners cannot throw a spanner into the works. He therefore prays that suitable directions be issued to the respondent No.9 to conduct - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 the elections. He further contends that if the petitioners are aggrieved by the elections so conducted, they may approach the competent authority under Section 70 of the Act, 1959. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent No.7 contends that the prescribed procedure under Rule 13-D(2-A) of Rules, 1960 is complied and the list of eligible voters is verified and published in accordance with Rule 13-D of the Rules, 1960 and therefore, the grievance if any of the petitioners, are to be urged before the concerned authority and not in a writ petition before this Court. 7. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 6 and learned counsel for the respondent Nos.7 and 8. 8. This court after considering the contentions urged in the writ petition had passed an order dated 11.07.2025 which reads as follows: "1. Issue notice to respondent No.8 returnable by 6.8.2025. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 2. Despite the letter dated 20.1.2025 wherein Election Authority had called upon the Deputy Registrar Co- operative Societies to cause enquiry as regards the eligibility of otherwise of several of the members to vote in terms of Section 20 (2) (A-4) (A-5), no enquiry has been conducted. The election authority on 27.5.2025 had called upon the Joint Registrar to conduct a similar enquiry. The Joint Registrar had inturn again directed the Deputy Registrar to conduct enquiry on 2.7.2025. 3. It is rather surprising that the Joint Registrar has again called upon the Deputy Registrar to conduct an enquiry when the Deputy Registrar not having conducted the enquiry, the election authority had called upon the Joint Registrar to conduct the enquiry. 4. Be that as it may, neither the Joint Registrar nor the Deputy Registrar have conducted the enquiry but a calendar of events has been issued. The calendar of events could not have been issued when the election authority has categorically indicated that the enquiry as regards the eligible and ineligible voters is required to be made. 5. In that view of the matter, the calendar of event dated 26.6.2025 at Annexure-G and any steps taken in pursuance thereto, are stayed till the next date of hearing. 6. Objections, if any, to be filed on or before 31.7.2025. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 7. Re-list on 6.8.2025." 9. The petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 4 have not disputed the fact that the Chief Executive Officer (respondent No.10) had issued a notice before preparing the eligible and in-eligible voters list as provided under Rule 13-D(2-A) of the Rules, 1960 and none of them had raised any objections. It is now stated at the bar by the learned counsel for the respondent No.7 that the election officer has prepared the eligible voters list 15 days prior to the date of election and therefore any dispute regarding the incorrect or illegal preparation of the voters list and consequent result of election has to be challenged before the concerned authority under Section 70 of the Act, 1959. The grievance of the petitioners in so far as continuing the respondent No.10 as an in-charge Chief Executive Officer, the respondent Nos.7 and 8 are bound to redress the same in accordance with law by appointing a regular Chief Executive Officer to oversee the functions of the respondent Nos.7 and 8. 10. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed off in the following terms: - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 (i) The elections that were scheduled to the respondent No.7 on 13.07.2025 shall be recommenced from the stage at which it was stayed by this Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii) The grievance of the petitioners regarding incorrect preparation of the voters list and the result of the election that may be declared, may be raised in a dispute under Section 70 of the Act, 1959 before the appropriate authority. (iii) The respondent No.8 shall take immediate steps for appointment of a fulltime Chief Executive Officer in accordance with Section 17-A of the Rules, 1960, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order failing which, the respondent No.4 shall take suitable action against the respondent No.8 and report the action taken to this Court. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33485 WP No. 20369 of 2025 (iv) In view of disposal of main petition, I.A.Nos.1/2025 and 2/2025 do not survive for consideration and the same stand rejected. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0