- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 2873 OF 2026 (CS-EL/M) BETWEEN: SRI V M BYRAREDDY S/O MUDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, PRESIDENT, VONTOOR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., VONTOOR VILLAGE, BASHETTAHALLI HOBLI, SIDDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 562 105. R/A VONTOOR VILLAGE, BASHETTAHALLI HOBLI, SIDDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT 562 105. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H., ADV.) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE 560 001. Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 2. STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION COMMISSION, 3RD FLOOR, TTMC 'A' BLOCK, SHANTHINAGARA, BANGALORE 560 027. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, ALI ASKAR ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001. 4. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT 562 101. 5. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, CHIKKABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION, CO-OPERATIVE UNION BUILDING, CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 101. 6. THE RETURNING OFFICER, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD., CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 101. 7. CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD., CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 101. ]REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER 8. THE SECRETARY / CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, VONTOOR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., VONTOOR VILLAGE, BASHETTAHALLI HOBLI, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 562 105. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D NAIK, AGA FOR R1, R3 TO R6, SRI DEVARAJ.A, ADV. FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE SIMILAR NATURE QUASHING THE LIST OF DISQUALIFIED DELEGATES VIDE ANNEXURE-H ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT SOCIETY IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO 8TH RESPONDENT SOCIETY AT SL. NO.1, B) ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE SIMILAR NATURE DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO CONDUCT ELECTION TO THE 7TH RESPONDENT SOCIETY BY TREATING THE PETITIONER HEREIN AS QUALIFIED AND BY PERMITTING HIM TO VOTE AS A DELEGATE OF THE 8TH RESPONDENT SOCIETY IN THE ELECTION TO BE HELD ON 01.02.2026, AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: a) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or order or direction in the similar nature quashing the list of disqualified delegates vide Annexure-H issued by the 7th respondent society in so far as it relates to 8th respondent Society at Sl.No.1; b) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction in the similar nature directing the respondent authorities to conduct election to the 7th respondent society by treating the petitioner herein as qualified and by permitting him to vote as a delegate of the 8th respondent society in the election to be held on 01.02.2026; c) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction in the similar nature directing the 6th respondent returning officer to consider the representation dated 27.01.2026 vide Annexure-F and accept the petitioner as delegate of the 8th respondent society; d) Grant such other relief or relief’s as this Hon’ble Court may deems fit to grant in the facts and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows: Respondent No.8-Society is registered under the provisions of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. Respondent No.7-Co-operative Union is functioning under the provisions of the Acts and Rules. The petitioner approached this Court in W.P.No.22229/2025 challenging the ineligible voters list and to permit them to cast their vote in the election of the society. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court granted an interim order on 24.07.2025 permitting the petitioners therein to cast their vote in the election scheduled to be held on 27.07.2025 to the Board of Directors of the Society. Subsequently, the said writ petition came to be dismissed on 18.12.2025 as having rendered infructuous. It is contended that the Returning Officer issued calendar of events on 13.01.2026 for the election to the post of President and Vice President by - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 fixing the date of election as 21.01.2026. The results were declared on 21.01.2026. The petitioner was elected as the President of respondent No.8-Society on 25.01.2026. The meeting of respondent No.8-Soceity was held and it was unanimously decided that the petitioner would be the delegate of respondent No.8-Society to franchise vote in the election to respondent No.7-Union scheduled to be held on 01.02.2026. It is contended that the District Election Officer appointed respondent No.6-Authority as an Election Officer/Returning Officer to conduct election to the Board of Management of respondent No.7-Union. Respondent No.7 issued a list of eligible and ineligible members for the purpose of election to the Board of Directors of respondent No.7-Union. The action of the respondent-Union in disqualifying the petitioner without assigning any reasons is contrary to the provision of Section 13-D (2-A) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Rules, 1960 (for short ‘the Rules of 1960’). Since no - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 individual notice was issued to the petitioner, calling for his explanation. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and also learned counsel for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, respondent No.7 committed an error in issuing the list of eligible and ineligible members. He submits that the petitioner is eligible to cast the vote on 01.02.2026 and he submits that the action of respondent No.7 is contrary to the provisions of Rule 13-D (2-A) of the Rules of 1960. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to quash Annexure-H and permit the petitioner to cast the vote on the election scheduled to be held on 01.02.2026 as the delegate of respondent No.8-Society. 5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the calendar of event was issued on - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 13.01.2026. He submits that once the calendar of event is issued, the Court cannot interfere in the election process and to buttress his arguments, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of INDERJIT BARUA & ORS. VS. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA reported in AIR 1984 SC 1911. He has also placed reliance on the judgment of MR. J. ROBERT VS. MR. RAM JETHMALANI reported in ILR 1990 KARNATAKA 1907, and also on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of SHAJI K. JOSEPH VS. V. VISWANATH AND OTHERS reported in (2016) 4 SCC 429. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition. 6. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 7. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner was elected as the Director of respondent No.8-Society, and respondent No.8 has passed a resolution delegating the petitioner as a representative of respondent No.8 to cast - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 the vote in the election scheduled to be held on 01.02.2026 for respondent No.7-Union. Later on, respondent No.7 has issued a list of disqualified delegates vide Annexure-H, wherein the name of the petitioner was shown in the disqualified list. The petitioner challenged the list of disqualified delegates vide Annexure-H. It is not open for the petitioner to challenge the electoral roll as illegal in preparation of electoral roll or inclusion of the names in the electoral roll. 8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of INDERJIT BARUA AND OTHERS VS. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA reported in AIR 1984 SUPREME COURT 1911, with reference to paragraph No.3, held which reads as under: “We are of the view that once the final electoral rolls are published and elections are held on the basis of such electoral rolls, it is not open to anyone to challenge the election from any constituency or constituencies on the ground that the electoral rolls were defective. That is not a ground available for challenging an election under - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 Section 100 of the Representation of People Act, 1951. The finality of the electoral rolls cannot be assailed in a proceeding challenging the validity of an election held on the basis of such electoral rolls vide Kabul Singh v. Kundan Singh. Article 329(b) in our opinion clearly bars any writ petition challenging the impugned elections on the ground that the electoral rolls of 1979 on the basis of which the impugned elections were held were invalid.” 9. A reading of the aforesaid judgment would clearly indicate that the Hon’ble Supreme Court held therein that, there is a clear bar to any writ petition challenging defect in electoral roll. 10. This Court placing a reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Court the case of J.ROBERT VS. RAM JETHMALANI reported in ILR 1990 (KAR) 1907 held that even if there is an error in preparation of electoral roll the same cannot be quested before the High Court. As far as perpetration of electoral roll, additional or deletion of - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 names etc., are all the matters pertaining to the dispute relating to election of member etc., that any dispute relating to electoral roll cannot be entrained in the writ petition. Hence, this Court holds that dispute relating to electoral roll cannot be entertained. 11. Another contention raised by the learned Additional Government Advocate that, once if the calendar of events is issued, the High Court has no right in interfering with the process of election especially when the process of election had started programme. In the present case, the Returning Officer has issued a calendar of events on 13.01.2026 for the election. 12. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of SHAJI K.JOSEPH VS. V.VISWANATH AND OTHERS reported in (2016) 4 SUPREME COURT CASES 429, this Court is of the view that, the High Court has no right in interfering with the process of - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5601 WP No. 2873 of 2026 election especially when the process of election had started upon. 13. The petitioner has no right to question the Annexure-H before this Court in the writ petition. Considering the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court referred supra, I do not find any grounds to interfere with the impugned order. 14, Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. 15. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed off accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB