Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 88682 (KAR)

SHRI. MAYUR ULLALA, v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/26516/2025 · 2025-09-11

R Nataraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36141 WP No. 26516 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 26516 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI.MAYUR ULLALA, S/O THIMMAPPA, AGED 55 YEARS T.C ROAD, ULLALA POST OFFICE MANGALURU - 575020. 2. SRI SHEKHARA (DIRECTOR) S/O VENKATAPPABANGERA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS AYIRABETTU, KUTTAR, MUNNURU POST OFFICE MANGALURU - 575017 3. SRI PRADEEPATHAVAR (DIRECTOR) S/O DEVADASATHAVAR AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS ADIMAAYENIDHI, SHANTHA ALVA COMPOUND, AMAR ALVA ROAD, MONKEY STAND POST, MANGALURU - 575001 4. SRI. SURESH S.K S/O CHENNAPPABANGERA AGED ABOVE 53 YEAR, HOUSE NO.2-41D, SUKHA NILAYA, KOOTE, SOORINJE, KATIPALLA, MANGALURU-575030 5. SMT. ROOPA W/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS KANKANADYPAKKALADKA POST Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36141 WP No. 26516 of 2025 MANGALURU - 575007 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CO OPERATION M S BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE 560001 2. THE CO OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY, 3RD FLOOR, SHANTHINAGAR TTMC, A BLOCK, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE 560027 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 3. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE BHAVAN, STATE BANK, MANGALORE D K 4. SRI MANAMOHANULLAL S/O RAMA SALIAN AGED MAJOR NO 18-25/4, SHIVANI 1ST CROSS, ULLALA BAIL, ULLAL MANGALORE 575020 5. SRI SHRAVANA KUMAR S/O SUDHAKAR AGED MAJOR NO 4/16/22, ULLASA NAGARA BAJAL, NANTHOOR, MANGALORE 575027 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36141 WP No. 26516 of 2025 6. SRI ASHOK KULAL M.K S/O M KANTAPPA, AGED MAJOR, 2-93/8, VISHWESH, NEAR GOVERNMENT COLLEGE, GANDHINAGARA, KAVURU, MANGALURU- 575020 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.HARISHA.A.S., AGA FOR R1 AND R3; VIDE ORDER DATED 11.09.2025, NOTICE TO R2, R4 TO R6 DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO(A) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE PROCEEDINGS, IN SUIT NO 85/2025-26 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE D AND E PENDING BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO 3 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 sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the proceedings in suit No.85/2025-26 dated 16.06.2025 pending before the respondent No.3. 2. The sum and substance of the case of the petitioners is that they were elected to the Board of Management of the Kumbara Gudi Kaigarika Sahakari Sangha - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36141 WP No. 26516 of 2025 Niyamitha, Chakrasoudha, Kulai, Mangalore.The petitioners contend that the respondent Nos.4 to 6 had raised an election dispute before the respondent No.3 under Sections 70 and 39(C) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (henceforth referred to as ‘the Act’ for short), beyond the time prescribed. Therefore, they contended that the respondent No.3 ought not to have entertained the election dispute and must have returned it or dismissed it. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were elected to Board of Management on 02.03.2025 and therefore, the last date for filing the election dispute was 01.04.2025. Contrarily, the election dispute was raised on 16.06.2025. He therefore contends that the respondent No.3 ought not to have entertained the election dispute but must have rejected it outrightly. 4. If the election petition is filed beyond the time prescribed, it is for the respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6 to approach the respondent No.3 and file appropriate application. They cannot approach this Court seeking rejection of the election dispute. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36141 WP No. 26516 of 2025 5. In that view of the matter, this petition is disposed off, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate application before the respondent No.3 and if such an application is filed, the respondent No.3 shall consider the application and dispose it off in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of filing the application. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file a memo of appearance within a period of ten days. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11