- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 8837 OF 2020 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. KOLATHUR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT KOLATHUR VILLAGE AND POST KASABA HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 REPRESENTED BY ITS IN-CHARGE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SRI. MUNIRAJU C. 2. KOLATHUR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., KOLATHUR VILLAGE AND POST KASABA HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI. G. RAMESH …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SOMASHEKAR, ADVOCATE (THROUGH VC)) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION, MARKET ROAD, Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 DODDABALLAPURA TOWN BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561205 2. SRI. H.DODDEGOWDA S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT KOLATHUR VILLAGE AND POST, KASABA HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR/RESPONDENT NO.2; S.R.KHAMROZ KHAN, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO ARRANGE FOR HANDING OVER ALL THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO THE PETITIONER SOCIETY IMMEDIATELY TO ENABLE THE PETITIONERS TO ISSUE CHARGESHEET AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioners have sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to arrange for handing over of all books of accounts and records after procuring it from respondent No.2 so as to enable them to issue a charge sheet. They have also sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order bearing No.¸À¤47/zÁªÁ/08/2018-19 dated 05.03.2019 passed by respondent No.1 as well as to quash the order dated 02.03.2020 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, (for short, 'the Tribunal'), Bengaluru, in Revision Petition No.31/2019. 2(i). The petitioner No.1 is a milk producers' co- operative Society (henceforth referred to as "Society") represented by its Chief Executive Officer. The respondent No.2 was appointed as a tester-cum-clerk in the Society and he worked between 1990 and 2001. In the year 2001, he was appointed as a Secretary and re-designated as a Chief Executive Officer of the Society. It is contended that - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 respondent No.2 was under an obligation to conduct elections to the Board and fix a date for the same on or before the expiry of the term of office bearers on 25.08.2018. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies (DRCS) by order dated 09.07.2018, appointed a Returning Officer to conduct the elections to the Society. The Returning Officer published a calendar of events fixing the date of elections as 11.09.2018. (ii) The respondent No.2 allegedly with a mala fide intention to ensure that an Administrator is appointed to the Society, did not bring the fact of appointment of a Returning Officer to conduct elections and publication of calendar of events, to the notice of the President of the Society. The respondent No.1 appointed an Administrator to the Society by an order dated 27.08.2018 which was challenged by the President of the Society and other Directors, in WP Nos.40053- 40054/2018 and WP Nos.40664-40670/2018. This Court noticed that the respondent No.2 herein who was the then Chief Executive Officer of the respondent No.4 therein - Society acted belligerently by not appearing before the Court despite the direction issued by this Court. The respondent No.2 herein was secured by an arrest warrant and this Court in terms of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 order dated 24.09.2018, enlarged him on bail subject to the conditions stated therein and, after noticing his conduct, imposed a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost payable to the Chief Minister's Natural Calamity Relief Fund within the time stipulated therein out of his personal funds. This Court also held by an order dated 12.10.2018 that the Secretary of the Society shall not interfere with the affairs of the Society till the conduct of the elections and results were announced. 3(i). The petitioners claim that elections to the Society were held on 28.10.2018 and the office bearers assumed office on 11.11.2018. The petitioners contend that they received a letter dated 21.11.2018 from Gowmithra Farms to the effect that they had paid a sum of Rs.2,18,157/- to the respondent No.2 for purchase of milk from the petitioner No.1 - Society and they had transferred the amount to the personal account of the respondent No.2. Petitioners contend that the respondent No.2 could not have received the amount into his personal account. This apart, the petitioners claimed that the respondent No.2 had included the names of eight non-existent persons as members of the petitioner No.1. However, sensing backlash in W.P No.40053-40054/2018 and connected petitions, the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 respondent No.2 had deleted the names of the said non- existing persons from the voters list. They contend that even after several notices and a police complaint, the respondent No.2 did not hand over the books of accounts and the entire charge of the Society. By letter dated 28.01.2019, the respondent No.2 agreed to furnish the documents and hand over the charge after decision was taken by the respondent No.1 concerning a challenge to the order of suspension of the respondent No.2 passed by the President of the Society. The petitioners followed up the issue by their letters dated 27.12.2018 and 05.02.2019 requesting the respondent No.1 to direct the respondent No.2 to hand over the books of accounts and records. The respondent No.1 by a letter dated 13.02.2019, directed the respondent No.2 to hand over the same to the petitioners. Despite the same, respondent No.2 did not hand over the books of accounts and records. (ii) The petitioners contend that a water treatment plant was installed in the premises of the Society in the year 2017 at a cost of more than Rs.5,00,000/- and each can of 20 Liters filtered water was sold at Rs.5/-. They alleged that the respondent No.2 did not account the collections made in this - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 regard between 2017 and 03.09.2019. The petitioners, therefore, passed a resolution to take over possession of the drinking water plant and for the period between 04.09.2019 to 07.06.2020, they had collected Rs.16,000/- to Rs.18,000/- per month. They alleged that the respondent No.2 did not remit the amount collected by him from sale of filtered water to the Society. They also alleged that the respondent No.2 had manipulated the records in respect of the milk supplied by his wife Smt. K.N. Manjula bearing membership No.413 and had got excess amount of Rs.6,51,488/- credited to his bank account. The petitioners alleged that after they obtained the documents from the Corporation Bank, they found that the wife of respondent No.2 had supplied milk which was valued at Rs.53,272/- but the respondent No.2 had obtained credit of Rs.7,04,760/- in his bank account. (iii) The petitioners contend that the respondent No.2 was placed under suspension in terms of the order dated 24.11.2018 passed by the President of the Society pursuant to the resolution of the Managing Committee of the Society dated 24.11.2018 pending an enquiry. The respondent No.2 challenged the said order of suspension before the respondent - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 No.1. The respondent No.1 in terms of the order dated 05.03.2019, stayed the said order of suspension dated 24.11.2018 on the ground that the Society had not issued show cause notice to the respondent No.2 herein and he was not afforded opportunity of hearing before passing the suspension order and also on the ground that the charge sheet was not issued to the respondent No.2 within three months from the date of suspension and the enquiry had not commenced within three months, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India through its Secretary and Another [(2015) 7 SCC 291]. The petitioners, therefore, filed Revision Petition No.31/2019 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') challenging the order dated 05.03.2019 passed by the respondent No.1 herein staying the order dated 24.11.2018 passed by the President of the Society suspending the respondent No.2 herein. The said revision petition was rejected by the Tribunal in terms of the order dated 02.03.2020. The petitioners are, therefore, before this Court challenging the said order dated 05.03.2019 passed by the respondent No.1 and the order dated 02.03.2020 passed by the Tribunal. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that respondent No.2 being the Chief Executive Officer of the Society is responsible for the maintenance of the books and other records of the Society. He contends that the respondent No.2 is in custody of all the records of the Society and therefore, the petitioners were not able to frame articles of charge and conduct an enquiry against the respondent No.2. He submitted that the request was made before the respondent No.1 to direct the respondent No.2 to furnish the documents and that the respondent No.2 had agreed to furnish them after the disposal of his dispute before the respondent No.1. He, therefore, contends that the petitioners were unable to issue an articles of charge and conclude the enquiry against the respondent No.2. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order dated 05.03.2019 passed by the respondent No.1 and the impugned order dated 02.03.2020 passed by the Tribunal be set aside since the order of stay would enable the respondent No.2 to come back to the Society and continue as its Chief Executive Officer. He submits that if this is allowed, the respondent No.2 would renew his acts of misappropriation of - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 funds of the Society and thereby cause hardship to the Society. He, therefore, prays that the impugned orders be set aside. 5. The writ petition is opposed by the respondent No.2 contending inter alia that he had joined the petitioner No.1 - Society as a Clerk on 01.04.1990 and he was promoted as a Tester in the year 1991. He claimed that he was appointed as a Secretary of the respondent No.1 in the year 2000-01 and that he was working to the satisfaction of the Society without any blemish. He claimed that elections to the Board of Management of the Society was scheduled on 11.09.2018 and accordingly, on 14.08.2018, the Returning Officer directed him to issue the calendar of events to all the eligible members. However, the President of the Society directed him not to send the calendar of events to the eligible members on the ground that another date would be announced for holding the Committee election after the Annual General Body meeting. He claimed that he therefore did not issue the calendar of events and waited for Annual General Body meeting to get over. He claimed that on 27.08.2018, an Administrator was appointed by the respondent No.1 to the Society since elections was not held in time. The appointment of the Administrator was challenged by some - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 Directors of the petitioner No.1 - Society in W.P NOs.40053- 40054/2018 and W.P Nos.40664-40670/2018. He contends that this Court passed an order directing him as well as the Returning Officer to be present before the Court. He claimed that this order was not to his knowledge and therefore, he did not appear and this Court issued a non-bailable warrant to him. He appeared through an Advocate and got the non-bailable warrant recalled. He contends that he complied with the order passed by this Court dated 24.09.2018 and he executed a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the satisfaction of the Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru and he deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- into the account of the Chief Minister's Natural Calamity Relief Fund. He contends that since election to the Managing Committee of the Society was conducted on 28.10.2018 and the election of the office bearers was held on 11.11.2018, W.P Nos.40053-40054/2018 and 40664- 40670/2018 were disposed off having been rendered infructuous in terms of the order of this Court dated 28.11.2018. Thereafter, on 24.11.2018, a monthly meeting was called by him. At the said meeting, he was not allowed to record the minutes of the meeting and one Mr. Muniraju C. was - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 appointed as the in-charge Secretary and it was resolved to authorize the President of the Society to take action against him. He contends that on the same day, i.e. on 24.11.2018, a notice was issued to him stating that he was suspended from service pending an enquiry. He claims that the reason for issuing the order of suspension was that he failed to circulate the calendar of events dated 14.08.2018 and that the date of election was not informed to all the members of the Society. He contends that there were no charges of misappropriation of funds against him. He contends that he was following the orders of the President of the Society who had directed him not to inform the members about the elections and therefore, he was not guilty of any lapse in communicating the date of election to the members. He contends that he was innocent of the allegations made and thus, he raised a dispute bearing No. ¸À¤47/zÁªÁ/08/2018-19 challenging the order of suspension dated 24.11.2018 passed by the President of the Society before the respondent No.1, who granted an interim order of stay of suspension on 05.03.2019. The petitioners challenged the said order of stay passed by the respondent No.1 before the Tribunal in Revision Petition No.31/2019. The Tribunal after - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 hearing both the parties, rejected the revision petition in terms of an order dated 02.03.2020. He contends that the petitioners have challenged the aforesaid orders in this writ petition. He contends that he did not misappropriate any funds of the Society and the same is evident from the audit report for the year 2017-18. He contends that the petitioners have alleged that respondent No.2 has concocted a resolution of the Board dated 30.06.2018 though majority of the Directors had attended the meeting on 30.06.2018 and had taken a decision to hold elections to the Society before the expiry of the term of the Managing Committee. He claims that those who attended the meeting had signed the resolution. Accordingly, the District Election Officer had appointed Smt. Yashodamma, the co- operative Development Officer as a Returning Officer in terms of an order dated 09.07.2018 and the Returning Officer had fixed the date of elections as 11.09.2018. He contends that the allegations of the petitioners that he did not bring it to the notice of the members of the Board about the appointment of the Returning Officer is strange and unbelievable. He contends that the Managing Committee of the Society was aware of the appointment of Returning Officer and issuance of calendar of - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 events and the President of the Society in order to ensure that elections are not conducted, had orally informed the respondent No.2 not to inform the members as there was a possibility of fixing another date after the Annual General Body meeting. With these and other contentions, he submitted that the allegations made against him for suspending him from the Society were baseless and therefore, the respondent No.1 and the Tribunal were justified in passing the impugned orders. He claims that though he was placed under suspension, he was not paid full subsistence allowance. He contends that an articles of charge dated 10.08.2020 was issued to him and he had denied all the allegations made therein by the reply dated 17.08.2020. He contends that the petitioners herein have filed applications, namely, I.A. Nos.2/2020 and 5/2020 before this Court. I.A. No.2/2020 is for a direction to the respondent No.1 to arrange for handing over all the books of accounts and records from the respondent No.2 to the petitioner - Society to enable it to issue charge sheet to respondent No.2 and I.A. No.5/2020 is for a direction to the respondent No.2 to verify and submit whether the amounts mentioned therein were transferred from the bank account of the petitioner - Society to the personal S.B. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 Accounts of respondent No.2 mentioned therein maintained at the Corporation Bank, Hoskote Branch, Gangamma Gudi Road, Honappa Layout, M.V. Extension, Hoskote. He claims that he does not have any documents and as per the direction of this Court, the lock was broke open and all the documents were taken into possession of the petitioners and hence, sought for dismissal of I.A. No.2/2020 and 5/2020. With regard to I.A. No.3/2020 filed by the petitioners seeking permission to produce the documents stated therein, he contended that the petitioners had not produced the documents at the time of filing of the petition and they could produce the said documents before the respondent No.1 where the dispute is pending and accordingly, sought for dismissal of I.A. No.3/2020. Thus, he contends that the impugned order dated 05.03.2019 passed by the respondent No.1 and the confirming order dated 02.03.2020 by the Tribunal are just and proper in the circumstances of the case and no interference is warranted. The order sheet maintained in this writ petition discloses that I.A. No.3/2020 was allowed on 02.12.2021. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 reiterated the above contentions and submitted that the respondent No.2 - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 was not responsible for the allegations made in the impugned order of suspension. He contends that the resolution dated 30.06.2018, the communication issued by the District Election Authority appointing a Returning Officer and the calendar of events issued by the Returning Officer could not have gone unnoticed by the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Society. He contends that the non-conduct of elections as per the calendar of events is due to the instructions issued by the President of the Society and the respondent No.2 cannot be held liable for any lapse in that regard. 7. The petitioner - Society has filed rejoinder denying the allegations made by the respondent No.2 8. Learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the respondent No.1 after being satisfied that the order of suspension of respondent No.2 passed by the President of the Society questioned before him needed a closer scrutiny, granted an order of stay and therefore, this Court should refrain from interfering with the exercise of discretion by the respondent No.1. - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 9. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 as well as the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 10. The respondent No.2 was suspended from service as the Chief Executive Officer of the petitioner No.1 - Society in terms of the communication/order dated 24.11.2018 issued/passed by the President of the petitioner No.1-Society in view of various allegations made against him. The respondent No.2 questioned it before the respondent No.1 who granted an order of stay of the said order of suspension on 05.03.2019. This order was assailed by the Society and its President before the Tribunal in Revision Petition No.31/2019 which was rejected in terms of the order dated 02.03.2020 and the petitioners are therefore before this Court. 11. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioners had filed application (I.A No.2/2020) seeking for a direction to the respondent No.1 to arrange for handing over all the books of accounts and records from the respondent No.2 to the petitioner - Society to enable it to issue charge sheet to - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 respondent No.2. The respondent No.2, however, claimed that he was not in possession of the documents and that all the documents are kept in the office of the Society. This Court, therefore, in terms of the order dated 22.07.2020, directed respondent No.1 to break open the locks which were applied in the premises of petitioner No.1 - Society on 28.07.2020 at 10.30 a.m. and draw up an inventory of all the items found in those locked places. It was further ordered that the items which were found shall be handed over by the respondent No.1 to the custody of the present Chief Executive Officer of the petitioner No.1 - Society. Further, respondent No.1 was directed to file a copy of the mahazar / inventory before the Court on or before 04.08.2020. 12. It is now stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that though the petitioners had served articles of charge on the respondent No.2, they are not in a position to conclude the enquiry as the required documents are not in their possession. He, therefore, contends that unless the respondent No.2 co-operates with the petitioners by furnishing the documents, the petitioners cannot conclude the enquiry at the earliest. - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 13. It appears from the statement of objections filed by the respondent No.2 that he was served with an articles of charge dated 10.08.2020. He claims that he has replied to the said Articles of charge on 17.08.2020 denying the charges. There is no stay of the conduct of any enquiry against the respondent No.2 by any Authority. The petitioners have not taken any steps to conclude the enquiry. However, they have contended before this Court that the documents required for concluding the enquiry is not in their possession and therefore, have filed application (I.A. No.2/2020) for a direction to the respondent No.1 to arrange for handing over all the books of accounts and records from the respondent No.2 to the petitioner - Society to enable it to issue charge sheet to respondent No.2. It is strange as to how the petitioners could have framed the articles of charge without there being corresponding documents. Even after lapse of more than five years, the petitioners have not taken any steps to conclude the enquiry and therefore, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this writ petition pending and accordingly, this petition is dismissed. - 20 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33688 WP No. 8837 of 2020 14. If the petitioners desire to proceed against respondent No.2 on any other allegation, they are open to do so in accordance with law. 15. In view of disposal of this petition, I.A. Nos.2/2020 for direction, I.A. No.4/2020 for stay, I.A. Nos.5 and 6 of 2020 for direction do not survive for consideration and the same stand disposed off. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE sma/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23