SMT. H R SATHYAVATHI v. KARNATAKA STATE PROSECUTING OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (REGD)
WP/21349/2026 · 2026-07-17
Suraj Govindaraj
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 29448 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 29448 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010471182026 NC: 2026:KHC:36866 WP No. 21349 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.21349 OF 2026 (GM-KSR)
BETWEEN:
SMT. H.R.SATHYAVATHI, W/O LATE SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, 72ND CCH COURT, CITY CIVIL COURTS, BENGALURU - 560 009.
R/AT DOOR NO.226-B2, NGV, SHARAVATHI BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 046. …PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA R., LEARNED SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT.SAKSHI M.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
KARNATAKA STATE PROSECUTING OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (REGD)., REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, SMT. K.L. BHAGYALAKSHMI, 6TH FLOOR, K.H.B. COMPLEX, KAVERI BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009.
Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010471182026 NC: 2026:KHC:36866 WP No. 21349 of 2026
2.
THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, FOURTH ZONE, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, 4TH FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHAMANTH NAIK, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SETTING ASIDE THE ELECTION OF THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ASSOCIATION PURPORTEDLY HELD ON 11.04.2026 AS BEING ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL, VOID AND CONTRARY TO THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION, BYE-LAWS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ASSOCIATION AND (ANNEXURE-D) AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER
1. Learned AGA is directed to accept notice for respondent No.2. 2. Notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. 3. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
“WHEREFORE, the Petitioner humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to: a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari setting aside the election of the Managing Committee of the 1st Respondent Association purportedly held on
- 3 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010471182026 NC: 2026:KHC:36866 WP No. 21349 of 2026
11.04.2026 as being arbitrary, illegal, void and contrary to the Memorandum of Association, Bye- laws of the 1st Respondent Association; and (Annexure-D) b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the election conducted on 11.04.2026 by the 1st Respondent Association is vitiated by illegality, bias, procedural impropriety, violation of the principles of natural justice and non-compliance with the mandatory provisions of the Bye-laws governing the Association, and consequently declare the entire election process and the results thereof as null and void; and (Annexure-D) c) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to conduct fresh elections to the Managing Committee of the 1st Respondent Association through an independent and impartial Election Officer, strictly in accordance with the Memorandum of Association, Bye-laws of the Association and the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, after preparing and publishing a valid voters' list and following a transparent and fair electoral process; d) Grant such other consequential reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
4. The reason for the petitioner to approach this Court as contented is that, the various documents requested by the petitioner to respondent No.1 as also respondent No.2 have not been provided by
- 4 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010471182026 NC: 2026:KHC:36866 WP No. 21349 of 2026
those Authorities on the ground that respondent No.1 is not a Public Authority. 5. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that an application had been made under the RTI Act, despite which, the information was not furnished. If that be so, it would be for the petitioner to avail of the appropriate remedies under the RTI Act challenging the order of refusal.
The non- furnishing of the documents cannot be a ground for this Court to entertain the dispute as regard to the election conducted in respect of a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act,
1960. 6. Reserving such liberty, the writ petition stands
disposed of. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
PB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15