Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10568 (KAR)

SMT. M NAGARATHNA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/6118/2025 · 2026-04-23

E S Indiresh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22148 WP NO.6118 OF 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.6118 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. M. NAGARATHNA W/O LATE M.K. PRABHU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT MULLUSOGI VILLAGE, KUSHALANAGARA HOBLI AND TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 234. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHESH C.M., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRASANNA D.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE, VIKASA SOUDA, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED (THE SOCIETY REGD. UNDER THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVES SOCITIES REGISTRATION, ACT) 3RD BLOCK, THYGARAJA ROAD, KUSHALANAGARA TOWN, KUSHALANAGARA TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 234. REP. BY ITS CHIEF- EXECUTIVE OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA FOR R1; SRI. VENKATESH R. BHAGATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22148 WP NO.6118 OF 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 31ST JANUARY, 2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-K; AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner is challenging the Endorsement dated 31st January, 2025 (Annexure-K) issued by the respondent No.2. 2. Heard Sri. Mahesh C.M., learned counsel on behalf of Sri. Prasanna D.P., appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.1; and Sri. Venkatesh R. Bhagath, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2. 3. Having taken note of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, on perusal of the writ petition, I am of the view that, this Court cannot accept the writ petition as the respondent No.2 is not an entity under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. In that view of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22148 WP NO.6118 OF 2025 matter, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Authority under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co- operative Societies Act, 1959, writ petition is disposed of. All contentions of the parties are kept open. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5