- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 106674 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SHIVALINGAPPA MOKASHI S/O. CHANNABASAPPA MOKASHI, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, DIRECTOR, PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, HUNASHIKATTI, TALUK BAILHONGAL, BELAGAVI DISTRICT- 591153. 2. KIRAN PATIL S/O. BASANAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, DIRECTOR, PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATTINA SAHAKAR SANGHA NIYAMITHA, KITTUR, TALUK: KITTUR, BELAGAVI DISTRICT-591115. 3. MANJUNATH ADIBATTI S/O. CHANNAVVA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, DIRECTOR, ABOUT 41 YEARS, DIRECTOR, PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, KITTUR, TALUK: KITTUR, BELAGAVI DISTRICT-591115. …PETITIONERS (BY SRIYUTHS. GURUDAS KANNUR, SR. COUNSEL FOR SHRINIVAS K. NADAMANI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 GOVERNMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. 2. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ALI ASKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. 3. CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY 3RD FLOOR, SHANTINAGAR TTMC, A BLOCK, KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ROAD, RAJA RAM MOHANROY EXTENSION, SHANTI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560027. 4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI AND THE DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER OF THE CO-OPERATIVE BANK AND SENIOR ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI SUB DIVISION, BELAGAVI-590016. 5. CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER THE BELAGAVI DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK AND SENIOR ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI SUB DIVISION, BELAGAVI-590016. 6. THE BELAGAVI DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., OLD PB ROAD, NEAR CENTRAL BUS STAND, BELAGAVI-590016, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRIYUTHS. GANGADHAR J.M, AAG AND RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R4; G.V. BHARMAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R5; K. ANANDKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R6) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ORDER 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A). ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 8.09.2025 BEARING NO. DCCB/ CHUNAVANE/ SA.CH./ VARGAVANE/CR302/2025-26 PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 8.09.2025 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-F.B) ISSUE WIT IN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. NIL DATED 8.09.2025 PASSED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT MARKED AS ANNEXURE-G.C) GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS DEEMED FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for Respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 4. Sri G.V. Bharmagoudar, learned counsel, accepts notice for Respondent Nos. 3 and 5. Sri K. Anand Kumar, learned counsel, is directed to accept notice for Respondent No. 6. 2. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Issue writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 8.09.2025 bearing no. DCCB/ Chunavane/Sa.Ch./Vargavane/CR302/2025-26 passed by the 4th respondent dated 8.09.2025 marked as Annexure-F. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 b. Issue wit in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order bearing no. NIL dated 8.09.2025 passed by the 6th respondent marked as Annexure-G. c. Grant such other reliefs as deemed fit under the facts and the circumstances of the case. 3. The grievance of the petitioners arises out of the instructions issued by the Deputy Commissioner and District Election Officer for Federal Co-operative Societies in Belagavi District, directing the 6th respondent to appoint Election Officers/Inspectors in respect of the M.K. Hubballi and Kittur branches of the concerned Society. 4. Sri.Gurudas Kannur, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that there being serious allegations of corruption and political interference against the previously appointed inspectors, namely Sri Basanagouda Linganagouda Patil and Sri Vikram Madivalappa Khodanpur. The Chief Executive officer of the Society having acted on the same had directed transfer of the said individuals, however, the 4th - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 respondent, namely the Deputy Commissioner and District Election Officer, directed the appointment of two other individuals in their place. 5. It is the contention of the petitioners that the Deputy Commissioner/District Election Officer lacks statutory power either to appoint or recommend appointment of such inspectors, and that the said action was taken at the instance of a local Member of Legislative Assembly, thereby undermining the autonomy of the Co-operative Society. 6. On behalf of the State and respondent authorities, the learned Additional Advocate General submits that the 4th respondent is not only the Deputy Commissioner but also the District Election Officer under Section 39 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short the Act). In terms of Rule 39AA of the said Act and Rule 13BB of the Rules framed thereunder, the Co-operative Election Authority is empowered to - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 appoint Election Officers at the district, regional or state level. It is stated that the 4th respondent has been appointed as the District Election Officer for all Federal Co-operative Societies in Belagavi District. Acting in that capacity and taking into consideration the serious allegations that had been made, the District Election Officer only made a recommendation to appoint two independent inspectors, which recommendation was subsequently accepted and acted upon by the 6th respondent. It is therefore contended that there is neither any irregularity nor illegality in the said process, and that the impugned directions do not suffer from want of jurisdiction. 7. Upon consideration of the submissions and material on record, it is clear that the 4th respondent acted not in his capacity as Deputy Commissioner, but as the District Election Officer duly appointed under statutory provisions. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 8. There is no dispute regarding the allegations made against the inspectors. Annexure-D reveals that Sri Veerappa Veerabasappa Doolappanavar, who was the Bank Inspector of Belagavi, has now been posted as the Bank Inspector of M.K. Hubballi. Sri Basanagouda Linganagouda Patil, who was the Bank Inspector of M.K. Hubballi and against whom allegations had been made, has been posted as the Bank Inspector of Belagavi. Shockingly, in terms of Annexure-E, Sri Arun Basanagouda Patil, who was the Branch Manager of M.K. Hubballi factory, has been posted as the Branch Inspector of Kittur. Sri Vikram Madivalappa Khodanpur, Bank Inspector of Kittur, against whom allegations have been made, has been posted as Branch Manager of M.K. Hubballi. This indicates that although the Bank Inspector at M.K. Hubballi has come from Belagavi, the Branch Manager of M.K. Hubballi is from Kittur, and the Bank Inspector at Kittur is from M.K. Hubballi. Though it is contended - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 that the Bank Manager has nothing to do with the allegations, the fact remains that they have virtually interchanged between M.K. Hubballi and Kittur, which does not inspire any confidence. The same is not a substantial change or transfer, it is an exercise in futility, window dressing, and fails to address the concerns of nepotism and political interference. 9. Though it is sought to be contended that Bank Managers are not involved in the conduct of elections, the fact remains that an interchange of persons holding positions of influence within the same institution and in the very branches in respect of which complaints had been made, does not inspire confidence in the electoral process. 10. In such circumstances, the appointment of two independent persons namely, Nagaraj Yallappa Bhajantri as the Bank Inspector of M.K. Hubballi and Shivanand Kallappa Kotagi as the Bank Inspector of - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 Kittur who have no connection with either M.K. Hubballi or Kittur, is both reasonable and necessary to ensure a free and fair process. 11. Importantly, this recommendation was not enforced directly by the District Election Officer, but was accepted and implemented by the 6th respondent, who is the appointing authority. 12. As the final order of appointment has been issued by the 6th respondent, and there is no challenge by that respondent to the same, the question of locus for the petitioners to assail such appointment does not arise. In the absence of any demonstration of mala fides or statutory violation, the petitioners have failed to establish any legal right to interfere with the said action. 13. It is also to be noted that the recommendation of the 4th respondent was only advisory in nature and does - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11861 WP No. 106674 of 2025 not, by itself, constitute an appointment order capable of being quashed. 14. In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the 4th respondent, acting as the District Election Officer, was well within his jurisdiction in making the recommendation in question. The 6th respondent having accepted and acted upon the said recommendation, and the appointments not being under challenge by that authority, the petitioners have not made out any case for interference. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE Vb/- Ct:pa List No.: 1 Sl No.: 272