Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 85315 (KAR)

SHRI AMAR S/O IRAGOUDA NERALI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/107001/2025 · 2025-11-10

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15376 WP No. 107001 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 107001 OF 2025 (CS-EL/M) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. AMAR S/O IRAGOUDA NERALI AGE: 53 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O GUDAS VILLAGE TQ: HUKKERI DIST: BELAGAVI-591309. 2. SHRI. RAJESH S/O SIDDAPPA BIRADARPATIL AGE: 55 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O SHIRGAOV VILLAGE TQ: HUKKERI DIST: BELAGAVI-591309. 3. SHRI. SATAPPA RAYAPPA KARKINAIK AGE 60 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O BELAVI VILLAGE TQ: HUKKERI DIST: BELAGAVI-591309. 4. SHRI. BASAVARAJ S/O VIRUPAXI GHATAGENNAVAR AGE: 52 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O SHIRGAOV VILLAGE Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15376 WP No. 107001 of 2025 TQ: HUKKERI DIST: BELAGAVI-591309. 5. SHRI. SURESH S/O SIDDAPPA TERANI AGE 56 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O SHIRGAOV VILLAGE TQ: HUKKERI DIST: BELAGAVI-591309. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRASHANT F GOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE BENGALURU 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT ALI ASKAR ROAD BENGALURU-560001 3. THE RETURNING OFFICER, THE HUKKERI RURAL ELECTRIC CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES LTD HUKKERI SHANKESHWAR ROAD HUKKERI, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591309. 4. THE HUKKERI RURAL ELECTRIC CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD HUKKERI SHANKESHWAR ROAD HUKKERI REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591309. 5. SHRI.SOMALING S/O BASAVANTAPPA PATIL AGE: 53 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O PATIL ONI, K YALLAPUR KARAYAPPI, HUKKERI BELGAVI-591309. 6. SHRI.PRAMOD S/O SIDAGOUDA PATIL AGE: 47 YEARS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15376 WP No. 107001 of 2025 OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O YALLAPURA VILLAGE KARAYAPPI, HUKKERI BELAGAVI-561122 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.RAMESH. B. CHIGRI., AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI.MALLIKARJUN SWAMY.B. HIREMATH., FOR C/R4; SRI.JAGADISH PATIL., FOR R5 TO R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER QUASHING AND SETTING ASIDE THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 10.09.2025 BEARING NO.CO 99 CLM 2025(E), BENGALURU, DATED 10.09.2025, ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE ON 16.09.2025, IN PURPORTED EXERCISE SECTION 121 OF THE KARNATAKA CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER/JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; i. Writ of certiorari or any other writ, order quashing and setting aside the government order dated 10.09.2025 bearing No.CO 99 CLM 2025(E), Bengaluru, dated 10.09.2025, issued by respondent No.1 published in the official gazette on 16.09.2025, in purported exercise Section 121 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, produced as Annexure-“A” ii. Writ of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3, the returning officer to the election of Board of Management of the respondent No.4 Society, to conduct the elections - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15376 WP No. 107001 of 2025 by following the provisions of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959, by considering the representations of the petitioners dated 08.09.2025 produced vide Annexure-H. iii. Grant such other reliefs which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity. 2. A memo dated 16.10.2025 has been filed, signed by the petitioners and learned counsel for the petitioner, which reads as under; Memo for withdrawal Herein the memo on behalf the petitioners is as under; It is submitted that the petitioners in the above- mentioned writ petition do not wish to prosecute the present petition. Hence, the petitioners may kindly be permitted to withdraw the above-mentioned writ petition, in the interest of justice & equity. 3. Accepting the said memo and submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 19 Sl No.: 4