- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30872 WP No. 25971 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 25971 OF 2023 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SOGALAPALYA MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY SOGALAPALYA VILALGE, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT BY ITS SECRETARY MR BALARAMA P E S/O EREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 2. SRI RUPESH S/O MENASE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, PRESIDENT SOGALAPALYA MILK PRODUCERS CO -OPERATIVE SOCIETY, SOGALAPALYA VILLAGE, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT 3. SRI MUTHACHARI S/O VENKATACHARI AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 4. SRI PUTTASWAMY S/O PUJARI EREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, SL. NO.3 & 4 ARE MEMBERS OF MANAGING COMMITTEE SOGALAPALYA MILK PRODUCERS CO -OPERATIVE SOCIETY, SOGALAPALYA VILLAGE, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30872 WP No. 25971 of 2023 RAMANAGARA DISTRICT AND RESIDENT OF HOROKOPPA PALYA SOGALA POST, VIRUKAPAKSHAPURA HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-563138 SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. H N BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES RAMANAGARA SUB DIVISION NO.4222, MUNICIPAL EXTENSION 3RD CROSS, WARD NO.12, RAMANAGARA-562159 2. SRI HEMALINGEGOWDA S/O KUNNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SOGALAPALYA VILLAGE VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-563138 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA FOR R1 SRI. JAI PRAKASH REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR C/R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07/10/2023 ON I.A. NO. 1/22-23 PASSED BY THE R1 IN DISPUTE NO. SANIRA-46/DAVE(DISPUTE)/01/2022-23 AS PER ANNEXURE-M. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30872 WP No. 25971 of 2023 ORAL ORDER The petitioners have sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 07.10.2023 on I.A.No.1/22- 23 passed by the 1st respondent in Dispute No.SaNiRa- 46/Dave(Dispute)/01/2022-23. 2. The petitioner No.1 is a Co-operative Society of which the petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4 were members. It appears that the proceedings were initiated against the petitioner No.2 under Section 29C of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (henceforth referred to as 'the Act, 1959' for short), on the ground that he was enrolled illegally as a member of the petitioner No.1. The said proceedings attained finality in terms of which, the competent authority held that the membership of the petitioner No.2 was valid. On the heels of the above, another proceeding was against the petitioner No.2 under Section 71(3) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, challenging his membership in the petitioner No.1. In the said proceedings, an interim order was granted staying the operation of the resolution passed by the respondent No.1 admitting the petitioner No.2 as a member of the petitioner No.1. This was then challenged before this Court in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30872 WP No. 25971 of 2023 WP.No.17353/2022. This Court in terms of an order dated 02.09.2022, held that the petitioner No.2 had an alternative remedy of a revision before the appropriate authority and therefore directed the petitioner No.2 to approach the competent revision authority. Following the above, the petitioner No.2 has approached the competent authority and proceedings are now pending before the competent revision authority, where an order of stay was granted. 3. In the meanwhile, another member of the petitioner No.1/Smt.Yeshodamma had initiated proceedings under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 ("the Act, 1959" for short) questioning the membership of the petitioner Nos.3 and 4, wherein an interim order was granted under Section 71(3) staying the resolution admitting the petitioner Nos.3 and 4 as members of the petitioner No.1. The said order is challenged before this Court in WP.No.2530/2023, where an interim order of stay is granted and the matter is pending. In the meanwhile, the respondent No.2 herein initiated proceedings under Section 7(2) of the Act, 1959 challenging the resolutions dated 06.08.2021, 16.11.2021 and 21.12.2021 to which the petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4 were parties as members - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30872 WP No. 25971 of 2023 of the managing committee of the petitioner No.1. The respondent No.2 inter alia contended that when the membership of the petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4 was in question, the resolutions dated 06.08.2021, 16.11.2021 and 21.12.2021 were invalid. He therefore prayed that the said resolutions be set at naught. The respondent No.1 in terms of an order dated 07.10.2023, stayed the resolutions dated 06.08.2021, 16.11.2021 and 21.12.2021 in terms of the impugned order. The petitioners are therefore before this Court challenging the said order primarily on the ground that the issue regarding the validity of the resolution admitting them as members of the petitioner No.1 is pending consideration before the authority and the respondent No.1 should therefore not have assumed that the resolutions admitting the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 as members of the petitioner No.1 were set aside. The petitioners therefore are before this Court challenging the aforesaid order. 4. When this petition was listed for preliminary hearing, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submitted that in terms of the resolutions dated 06.08.2021, 16.11.2021 and 21.12.2021, the respondent No.2 was suspended from service pending an enquiry and presently, the enquiry is held - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30872 WP No. 25971 of 2023 and an order of dismissal was passed on 13.04.2022. He therefore contends that the impugned order has become academic, as the respondent No.2 is bound to challenge the order of dismissal in an appropriate proceeding. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate also reiterates the contentions of the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 6. As rightly contended by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, the validity or otherwise of the resolutions passed by the petitioner No.1 admitting the petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4 is still pending consideration before the competent authorities. Consequently, the resolutions dated 06.08.2021, 16.11.2021 and 21.12.2021 to which the petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4 were parties as members of the managing committee of the petitioner No.1, have to be saved by applying the de-facto doctrine. In this regard, it is profitable to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gokaraju Rangaraju vs State of Andhra Pradesh [AIR 1981 SC 1473]. Even assuming that the membership of the petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4 are annulled or stayed, the resolutions to which they are parties cannot be - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30872 WP No. 25971 of 2023 invalidated. Be that as it may, since the respondent No.1 has proceeded on the assumption that the membership of the petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4 were stayed and therefore, the resolutions passed by them were also invalid, does not stand to reason. Consequently, the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1 on that premise deserves to be set aside. 7. In addition, since the respondent No.2 has now stated that following the resolutions dated 06.08.2021, 16.11.2021 and 21.12.2021, the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him and an order was passed dismissing him from service, he is bound to challenge the same in accordance with law and the anchor sheet of the order dismissing the respondent No.2 from service, namely the resolutions dated 06.08.2021, 16.11.2021 and 21.12.2021 cannot be dissolved. 8. In that view of the matter, the following order is passed: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order passed by the respondent No.1 dated 07.10.2023 is quashed. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30872 WP No. 25971 of 2023 iii) It is however open for the respondent No.2 to raise all contentions available to him once the proceedings before the respondent No.1 regarding the validity and invalidity of the membership of the petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4 is decided in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23