- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA WRIT PETITION NO. 15009 OF 2024 (CS-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 15028 OF 2024 (CS-RES) IN WP NO. 15009/2024 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. R.T. DYAVEGOWDA S/O. LATE THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS R/AT RAVINDRANAGARA HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT HASSAN - 573 201. 2. SRI. HANUMANTHE GOWDA S/O. THAMME GOWDA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/AT KOLATHURU TALUK AND DISTRICT BENGALURU RURAL - 562 114. 3. SRI. B.G. VENKATEGOWDA S/O. LATE M. GOVINDAIAH AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT BIDARAKATTE, NAGAVALLI TALUK AND DISTRICT TUMKUR - 572 118. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI: JAYKUMAR .S. PATIL, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI: ABHIJIT HARANAHALLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPT. OF CO-OPERATION REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by NANDINI B G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD BENGALURU - 560 052. 3. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD BENGALURU - 560 052. 4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD BENGALURU - 560 052. 5. THE KARNATAKA STATE CO OPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER NO.32, 3RD FLOOR D. DEVARAJ URS ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R4 SRI: K ANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO.RCS/KAISASAM-1/KALAM64/2022.23 DATED 21.09.2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND QUASH THE ENQUIRY INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4- JOINT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, BENGALURU VIDE IMPUGNED NOTICES BEARING NO.JAM.NI./KALAM64RAVICHARANE/01/2023.24 DATED 06.02.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A1 AND IMPUGNED NOTICES BEARING NO.JAM.NI./KALAM64RAVICHANARANE/01/2023.24/06 DATED 25.03.2024 AND 15.04.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A2 AND A3 AND ETC., IN WP NO. 15028/2024 BETWEEN: 1. SRI NAGARAJA A C S/O LATE CHANNAPPA G - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS AVATHI VILLAGE AND POST DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL - 562 110 2. J.M. SHIVAPRASAD S/O J M VRUSBHENDRAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS NO. 13, GURU KRUPA FARM HOUSE KUDLIGI ROAD, SANDUR BALLARI - 583 119 3. SRI JAGADISH KAVATAGIMATH S/O MALLIKARJUN KAVATAGIMATH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 898, GURUWAR PETH, CHIKODI BELGAUM - 591 201 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JAYKUMAR .S. PATIL, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MAHAMAD TAHIR .A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY M.S. BUILDING BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ALI ASKER ROAD BANGALORE - 560 052. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY BANGALORE AND ALSO SEC 64 ENQUIRY OFFICER, T.T.M.C. BUILDING SHANTINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 027. 4. THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE FEDERATION NO. 32, THIRD FLOOR - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 DEVARAJ URS ROAD (RACE COURSE ROAD) BANGALORE - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MD 5. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ALI ASKER ROAD BANGALORE - 560 052 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO 3 & 5 SRI: K. ANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21/09/2023 BEARING REFERENCE NO.RCS/KISASUM1/KISASUM 64/2022-23 AT ANNEXURE-F ISSUED BY R5 AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL COMMON ORDER The petitioners have approached this Court seeking issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 21.09.2023 passed by respondent No.3 produced at Annexure-A and also to quash the proceedings initiated by respondent No.4 by issuing notices dated 06.02.2024, 25.03.2024 and 15.04.2024 respectively produced as per Annexures-A1, A2 and A3 in Writ Petition No.15009 of 2024 and to quash the order dated 21.09.2023 passed by respondent - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 No.5 produced at Annexure-F in Writ Petition No.15028 of 2024. 2. Heard Sri Jayakumar S Patil, learned senior advocate for Sri Abhijit Haranahalli and Mahamad Tahir A, learned counsel for the petitioners respectively, Sri Yogesh D Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4 in Writ Petition No.15009 of 2024 and respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5 in Writ Petition No.15028 of 2024 and Sri K Ananda, learned counsel for respondent No.5 in Writ Petition No.15009 of 2024 and respondent No.4 in Writ Petition No.15028 of 2024. Perused the materials on record. 3. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: "Whether the petitioners have made out any grounds to allow the petitions?" My answer to the above point is in the 'Affirmative' for the following: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 REASONS 4. It is the contention of the petitioners that enquiry under Section 64 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, was initiated by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies. But initiation of the said proceedings was not suo moto, but it was at the instance of an unauthorized person i.e., Hon'ble Chief Minister of the State. Learned senior advocate for the petitioners refers to Annexures-A to F to contend that the complaint was presented to the Chief Minister and the same was forwarded with a specific direction to initiate action and to submit a report. Even the direction was issued to appoint a particular person as Enquiry Officer and the same was followed without application of mind. Therefore, exercise of power is not in accordance with Section 64 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. 5. Annexure-B referred to above prima facie discloses that the complaint even though contains very serious allegations, the same was submitted to the Chief Minister of State, who in turn directed the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to hold an enquiry and to submit a report. The complaint as per Annexure-A is addressed to the Chief Minister. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 As per Annexure-B, the Under Secretary to the Government forwarded the complaint to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies directing him to initiate the proceedings. Annexure-C is the similar report submitted to the Chief Minister who in turn directed the Principal Secretary to the Government to take necessary action. Annexure-E1 is the letter addressed by the Principal Secretary to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies directing to appoint a particular person as Enquiry Officer and the same is followed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies by passing the order as per Annexure-F. 6. Learned senior advocate for the petitioners has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Madhya Pradesh and Others Vs Sanjay Nagayach and Others1, in support of his contention wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court addressing a similar situation held in paragraphs 36 and 37 as under: "36. Statutory functionaries like the Registrar/Joint Registrar of cooperative societies functioning under the respective Cooperative Act must be above suspicion and function independently without 1 (2013) 7 SCC 25 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 external pressure. When an authority invested with the power purports to act on its own but in substance the power is exercised by external guidance or pressure, it would amount to non-exercise of power, statutorily vested. Large number of cases are coming up before this Court and the High Courts in the country challenging the orders of supersession and many of them are being passed by the statutory functionaries due to external influence ignoring the fact that they are ousting a democratically elected Board, the consequence of which is also grave because the members of the Board of Directors would also stand disqualified in standing for the succeeding election as well. 37. The Registrar/Joint Registrar, while exercising powers of supersession has to form an opinion and that opinion must be based on some objective criteria, which has nexus with the final decision. A statutory authority shall not act with pre-conceived notion and shall not speak his masters' voice, because the formation of opinion must be his own, not of somebody else in power, to achieve some ulterior motive. There may be situations where the Registrar/Joint Registrar are expected to act in the best interest of the society and its members, but in such situations, they have to act bona fide and within the four corners of the statute. In our view, the impugned order will not fall in that category." - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 7. Learned senior advocate also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Joint Action Committee of Air Line Pilots' Association of India (Alpai) and Others Vs Director General of Civil Aviation and Others2, wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court held in paragraphs 26 and 27 as under: "26. The contention was raised before the High Court that the Circular dated 29-5-2008 has been issued by the authority having no competence, thus cannot be enforced. It is a settled legal proposition that the authority which has been conferred with the competence under the statute alone can pass the order. No other person, even a superior authority, can interfere with the functioning of the statutory authority. In a democratic set-up like ours, persons occupying key positions are not supposed to mortgage their discretion, volition and decision-making authority and be prepared to give way to carry out commands having no sanctity in law. Thus, if any decision is taken by a statutory authority at the behest or on suggestion of a person who has no statutory role to play, the same would be patently illegal. 27. Similar view has been reiterated by this Court in Commr. of Police v. Gordhandas Bhanji, Bahadursinh Lakhubhai Gohil v. Jagdishbhai M. Kamalia and Pancham Chand v. State of H.P. observing that an authority vested with the power to act under the statute alone should 2 (2011) 5 SCC 435 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 exercise its discretion following the procedure prescribed therein and interference on the part of any authority upon whom the statute does not confer any jurisdiction, is wholly unwarranted in law. It violates the constitutional scheme." 8. On perusal of the Annexures referred to above, it is clear case of action taken by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies as per the direction of the Chief Minister. No complaint was filed before the Registrar as required and no enquiry was initiated in accordance with Section 64 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. Definitely the proceedings initiated is under the external influence, which is not permissible in law. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the proceedings initiated which is impugned in these petitions are liable to be quashed. However, liberty may be reserved for any aggrieved persons to present the complaint with the Registrar of Co-operative Societies as required in law. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies may also initiate action suo moto as per Section 64 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41021 WP No. 15009 of 2024 C/W WP No. 15028 of 2024 9. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The Writ Petitions are allowed. (ii) The order dated 21.09.2023 passed by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-A and by respondent No.5 vide Annexure- F; the notice dated 06.02.2024 passed by respondent No.4 vide Annexure-A1 and the notices dated 25.03.2024 and 15.04.2024 passed by respondent No.4 vide Annexures-A2 and A3 are hereby quashed. iii) Liberty is reserved with the aggrieved persons, if any, to present the complaint before the Registrar of Co- operative Societies, as required in law, upon which, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies may initiate action in accordance with law. (iv) The Registrar of Co-operative Societies is also at liberty to initiate action suo moto as per Section 64 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act and proceed in accordance with law. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE *bgn/- CT:VS List No.: 3 Sl No.: 17