- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 7858 OF 2020 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: RAJASHEKAR B S S/O SRINIVASAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O BALENAHALLI VILLAGE MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JAI PRAKASH REDDY M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT, KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT ROOM NO.610, 3RD GATE, 6TH FLOOR, M S BUILDING, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES CONSUMER AND MARKETING HEAD OFFICE HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.1 ALI ASGAR ROAD BENGALURU-560052 Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 3. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES SAHAKARA SOUDHA MARGOSA ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU-560003 4. BANGALORE, BANGALROE RURAL AND RAMANAGARA DISRICT CENTRAL CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED HAVING OFFICE AT NO.06, 5TH MAIN, LAKSHMISADHANA, CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU-560018 BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER 5. MR H N ASHOKA S/O H G NARASAPPA AGED 44 YEARS, R/O NO.21, MIG, 1ST CROSS, 1ST STAGE, KHB COLONY BASAVESHWARNAGAR BENGALURU-560079 …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI. YOGESH D NAIK., AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. SOMASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4 SRI. BHARATH K., ADVOCATE FOR C/R5 (CP NO.4844/2020)] THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 23.03.2020 IN APPEAL VIDE ANNX-E PASSED BY R-2. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 23.03.2020 passed in Appeal No.ANI (C&M) DAP / D1 / 04 / 2018-19 vide Annexure-E by respondent No.2. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows: 3. The petitioner is a member of the primary society and he lodged a complaint against respondent No.5 before respondent No.3, stating that one of the employee of respondent No.4-Bank, Mr.Krishnamurthy had misappropriated the funds of respondent No.4-Bank with the support of respondent No.5 and was depositing the same in the account of M/s.Suraj Digital Printers. An amount of Rs.20 lakhs was received by two cheques from M/s.Suraj Digital Printers and subsequently, and the said amount was deposited into the account of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 M/s.Suraj Digital Printers on 13.05.2015, when a report regarding the misappropriation was filed. Hence, the delinquent employee and respondent No.5 were jointly misappropriating the funds of respondent No.4. Sri.Krishnamurthy, who was the employee of respondent No.4-Bank and against him there was an allegation of misappropriation of ₹11,00,00,000/- in respondent No.4-Bank, was dismissed from service. Respondent No.3 had also attached the properties of the proprietor of M/s.Suraj Digital Printers. 4. Respondent No.5 submitted a reply to respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 after considering the same passed the impugned order under Section 29C(8)(b), 29C(8)(c) and 29C(8)(d) of the Act, disqualifying respondent No.5 from the post of Director of respondent No.4 bank and any other cooperative Bank for a period of five years. Respondent No.5, aggrieved by the order passed by respondent No.3, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 preferred an appeal before respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 vide order dated 23.03.2020 allowed the appeal and set aside the order of termination of respondent No.3 Hence, the petitioner, aggrieved by the order passed by respondent No.2, filed this writ petition. 5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3, and learned counsel for respondent No.4. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.2 without assigning any reasons has allowed the appeal. He submits that respondent No.2, while passing the impugned order has not applied its mind. The said order is cryptic in nature and hence, on these grounds, submits that the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 is - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 arbitrary and erroneous and without application of mind. Accordingly, prays to allow the writ petition. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.4 supports the impugned order. 8. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 fairly concedes that respondent No.2 has not assigned any detailed reasons in the impugned order for reversing the earlier order. Hence, prays to dispose of the writ petition. 9. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties. 10. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner is a member of the primary Society and lodged a complaint before respondent No.3 against respondent No.5 stating that the employees of respondent No.4-Bank had misappropriated the funds of respondent No.4-Bank. An enquiry was held - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 and respondent No.3 has passed an order of disqualifying respondent No.5 from the post of Director of respondent No.4-Bank, and any other co- operative Bank for a period of five years. 11. Respondent No.5, aggrieved by the order passed by respondent No.3, preferred an appeal before respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 allowed the appeal by the impugned order dated 23.03.2020 and set aside the order passed by respondent No.3. 12. I have perused the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 and it is pertinent to state here that respondent No.2 has not assigned any cogent and detailed reasons for setting aside the order of termination. The reasons assigned by respondent No.2 in the impugned order is as follows: ““““ೕನ ೆ ೆಗಳ ಪಕರಣದ ಾಸಾಂಶಗಳನು ಕೂಲಂಕುಷಾ ಪ !ೕಸಾ, ೕಲ"ನ#$ಾರರು 2ೇ ಪ%ಾ& ಸಹ(ಾರ )ಾ*ಂ+ನ ಆಡ.ತ ಮಂಡ.1ೆ &ಾಂಕ: 13-06-2015 ರಂದು - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 ಚುಾ3ತ4ಾಗುವ ಪ6ವ7ದ ಇದ9 ಆ4ೋಪ(ೆ: ಸಂಬಂ<=ದಂ>ೆ ಇರುತ$ೆ. ಈ ಆ4ೋಪ(ೆ: ಸಂಬಂ<=ದಂ>ೆ, ಕಲಂ 29= ರನ@ಯ &ಾಂಕ: 25-05- 2015 ರಂದು ೋBೕಸು Cೕಡುವ ಮೂಲಕ ಕಮ (ೈ1ೊಂEರುವFದು, ಚುಾವGೆಯ ಪ6ವ7ದ ಅನಹ7>ೆ1ೆ ಸಂಬಂ<=$ಾ9$ೆ. ೕನ 1ೌರಾC@ತ ಉಚK ಾ*Lಾಲಯದ %ೕM7ನ ಅನ@ಯ ಕಲಂ 29= ರನ@ಯ 1ೇ ಪ%ಾ&ಯ ಕಮ ಊO7ತಾರುವF&ಲ. ಆದ(ಾರಣ ಈ (ೆಳನಂ>ೆ ಆ$ೇ!=$ೆ. -: ಆ$ೇಶ ಆ$ೇಶ ಆ$ೇಶ ಆ$ೇಶ:- ೕೆ #ವ =ದ (ಾರಣಗಳ ೆ ೆಯ, ೕಲ"ನ#$ಾರರು ಸ=ರುವ ೕಲ"ನ#ಯನು ಪFರಸ: =$ೆ. 1ೇ ಪ%ಾ& ಸಹ(ಾರ ಸಂಘಗಳ ಜಂB Cಬಂಧಕರು, )ೆಂಗಳTರು Uಾಂತ, )ೆಂಗಳTರು ಇವರು ಕಲಂ 29=(8)(V)(=) ಮತು (E) ರನ@ಯ WೊರE=ರುವ, ಪ! ತ ಆ$ೇಶದನ@ಯ ೕಲ"ನ#$ಾರರನು ಮುಂ&ನ 5 ವಷ7ಗಳ ಅವ<1ೆ )ಾ*ಂ+ನ ಮತು ಇC ತರ LಾವF$ೇ ಸಹ(ಾರ ಸಂಘಗಳ ಸX% ಸದಸ*4ಾಗದಂ>ೆ, ಅನಹ71ೊ.=, WೊರE=ರುವ ಆ$ೇಶದ ಸಂYೆ* Zೆಆ[ V/$ಾಾ/29= /03/2015-16 &ಾಂಕ 05-06- 2018 ನು ರದು91ೊ.=$ೆ ಈ ಆ$ೇಶವನು &ಾಂಕ: 23-03-2020 ರಂದು ನನ ಸ ಮತು ಾ*Lಾಲಯದ ಮು$ೆ]ಂ&1ೆ >ೆ4ೆದ ಾ*Lಾಲಯದ ^ೂೕ_=$ೆ.” - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 13. From the perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the order passed by respondent No.2 is bereft of cogent reasons for reversing the order of termination passed by respondent No.3. Thus, the order passed by respondent No.2 is contrary to the records produced by the petitioner. Thus, on this ground alone, the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 14. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 23.03.2020 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-A is quashed. (iii) The appeal is restored to its original file. Respondent No.2 for reconsideration of the same afresh. (iv) Respondent No.2 is directed to assign detailed and cogent reasons - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9234 WP No. 7858 of 2020 and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. (v) All the contentions of the parties are kept open. (vi) Respondent No.2 is directed to issue notice to the parties, provide sufficient opportunity of hearing to the parties and thereafter, pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. (vii) Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RK CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44