- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33478 WP No. 25748 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. 25748 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. S.V. DEVARAJU S/O. B. VENKATAIAH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/@ SATHANURU, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. 2. SRI. CHANNAPPA S/O LATE POOJARI PAPANNA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/@ SATHANURU, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. 3. SRI. RAVI S/O LATE PAPEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/@ SATHANURU, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. 4. SRI. BORAIAH S/O LATE CHANNAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/@ SATHANURU, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. 5. SRI. S.N.SHANKARA S/O NARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/@ SATHANURU, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ABHINAV R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANIL KUMAR B.S., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33478 WP No. 25748 of 2025 AND: 1. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES MANDYA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571401 2. SMT. D. ASHA, ELECTION OFFICER AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, SALE OFFICER, MALAVALLI, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY OFFICE, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. 3. SRI. VENKATESHMURTHY, MONITORING OFFICER, SATHANURU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MANDYA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. 4. SATHANURU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. REPRESENTED BY ITS CEO 5. SRI. S.R. NANDEESH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O RAMANNA, SATHANURU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. 6. SRI. DODDACHANNAIAH AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, S/O LATE KOTTEDODDAHUCCHA HEGDE, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33478 WP No. 25748 of 2025 VICE PRESIDENT, SATHANURU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. 7. SRI. SATHISHA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, S/O LATE PUTTAIAH, 8. SRI. S.R.RAVI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O RAMANNA, 9. SRI. S.P. SWAMI AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O. LATE CHIKKADASE HEGDE 10. SRI. VIJAYA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O LATE T. SHANKARAIAH 11. SRI. KARIYAIAH AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, S/O LATE BORAIAH, 12. SMT. K.SHASHI AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, W/O S.B. NARASAIAH, 13. SRI. K.RADHA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, S/O S.B.SHEKHARA, 14. SRI. MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O BOMMAIAH, 15. SRI. R.B.NARASIMHA HEGDE AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, S/O BEERAIAH, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33478 WP No. 25748 of 2025 RESPONDENT NO.7 TO 15 ARE R/@ DIRECTORS, SATHANURU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL ALONG WITH SRI. HARISHA A.S., ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 04.08.2025 PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MANDYA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA DISTRICT IN CASE NUMBER AR39/DDS/25/2024-25 AT ANNEXURE-H TO THE WRIT PETITION AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION DATED 24.02.2025 FILED BY PETITIONERS IN THE PROCEEDING, AT ANNEXURE-C TO THE WRIT PETITION, BY ALLOWING THE PRESENT PETITION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioners have challenged an order dated 04.08.2025 passed by the respondent No.1 in Case No.AR- 39:DDS:25:2024-25 (Annexure 'H') by which it rejected an application filed by the petitioners herein under Section 71 (3) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33478 WP No. 25748 of 2025 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short, 'the Act, 1959') was rejected. 2. The petitioners are members of the respondent No.4. The elections to the Managing Committee of the respondent No.4 was held on 24.01.2025 and the results were announced on the same day declaring respondent Nos.5 to 15 as elected. The petitioners are unsuccessful candidates and feeling aggrieved by the results of the election, raised a dispute under Section 70 of the Act, 1959 before the respondent No.1. An application was filed by the petitioners under Section 71(3) of the Act, 1959 for an interim relief to restrain the elected body of the respondent No.4 - Society from calling any meetings of the Managing Committee and to restrain the respondent Nos.5 to 15 from participating in the meetings of the Managing Committee of the respondent No.4 until the dispute raised by the petitioners regarding the declaration of respondent Nos.1 to 15 as Directors of respondent No.4 herein by respondent No.2 was decided. This application was rejected by the respondent No.1 in terms of the impugned order. The petitioners are, therefore, before this Court challenging the said order. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33478 WP No. 25748 of 2025 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent No.1 must have considered the prima facie case based on the material produced by the petitioners to assess whether the case warranted an interim relief. He contends that if the material placed before the respondent No.1 is perused, it clearly gives an indication that certain ineligible members were included in the final list of eligible voters and this was just enough to invalidate the elections to the Managing Committee of respondent No.4. He, therefore, contends that the respondent No.1 must have restrained the respondent Nos.5 to 15 herein from participating in the meetings of the Managing Committee. He further submits that the respondent No.4 is bound to nominate a member to be sent as a delegate to the Apex Society and if the same is done, it would result in an irreversible act and therefore, the respondent No.1 ought to have passed some interim protection to ensure that the delegate is not nominated. 4. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General representing the respondent Nos.1 to 3 submitted that the respondent No.1 has considered the material placed before him and has rightly held that no interim relief is warranted. She - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33478 WP No. 25748 of 2025 further submits that the interim reliefs are in the nature of final reliefs that are sought. Hence, respondent No.1 was justified in not granting any indulgence. Besides this, she contends that the respondent No.4 at its meeting held today, has nominated one of its Directors as a delegate to the Apex Society. She, therefore, contends that no interference is warranted with the impugned order. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent Nos.1 to 3. 6. The petitioners have raised a dispute alleging certain illegalities in the preparation of voters list and have challenged the election of the respondent Nos.5 to 15 as Directors of the respondent No.4. In the meanwhile, the petitioners have filed an application under Section 71(3) of the Act, 1959 to restrain the respondent Nos.5 to 15 from participating in the meetings of the Managing Committee until the dispute raised by the petitioners herein regarding declaration of respondent Nos.1 to 15 herein as Directors of respondent No.4 herein by the respondent No.2 herein was - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33478 WP No. 25748 of 2025 decided. As rightly contended by the learned Additional Advocate General, granting interim relief sought by the petitioners would result in granting the final relief as the respondent Nos.5 to 15 herein were lawfully elected as the Directors of the respondent No.4 and until the contrary was proved, there can be no restraint against a democratically elected body from performing their duties. The apprehension of the petitioners that the Managing Committee may nominate a delegate to the Apex Society which cannot be overturned or recalled, can be taken care of by holding that any such delegation shall be subject to the result of the election dispute before the respondent No.1. This would take care of the apprehension expressed by the petitioners. 7. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed off upholding the impugned order dated 04.08.2025 passed by the respondent No.1 in dispute No.AR39:DDS:25:2024-25. However, any decision to nominate any Director of the respondent No.4 as a delegate to the Apex Society shall be subject to the result of the said dispute before the respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 is directed to conclude and dispose - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33478 WP No. 25748 of 2025 off the said dispute within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 8. Any observations made by the respondent No.1 in the course of the impugned order shall not impact or affect the final outcome of the proceedings. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE SMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13