- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1074 WP No. 105993 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.105993 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: TANJEEM EDUCATION SOCIETY INCHAL ROAD, BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, R/BY ITS SECRETARY. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B.NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND DEPUTY REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI-590001. 2. THE ENQUIRY OFFICER, SRI B.R. SINGARI, RETIRED DEPUTY REGISTRAR KANCHAVEERA NAGAR, MUTHAGA, TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI-590008. 3. SRI ASHPAK AHMED IMAMSAB NANDAGAD, AGE. MAJOR, R/O. JALAGAR GALLI, BAILHONGAL, DIST. BEALGAVI DISTRICT-590012. 4. SRI FAZAL MOHAMMADKHAN PATHAN, AGE. MAJOR, R/O. NEW LANE ONI, BAILHONGAL, Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1074 WP No. 105993 of 2025 BELAGAVI DISTRICT-591102. 5. RIYAZ AHMED DAWALSAB NANDAGHAD, AGE. MAJOR, R/O. BAILHONGAL TOWN, BELAGAVI DISTRICT-591102. 6. MOHAMMAD IQBAL KOHALI, AGE. MAJOR, R/O. BAILHONGAL TOWN, BELAGAVI DISTRICT-591102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADV. FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. SHIVARAJ P.MUDHOL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21.07.2025 BEARING NO.DRL/S.SAM/BAI.VI/KALAM-25/C.R- 101/ 2025-26 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-C, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. B. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 14.07.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-B, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1074 WP No. 105993 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: “PRAYER WHEREFORE, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to: A. Issue a Writ of Certiorari and quash the Impugned Order Dated 21.07.2025 bearing No.DRL/S.Sam/Bai.Vi/ Kalam-25/C.R-101/2025-26 passed by the 1st respondent vide Annexure-C, in the interest of justice and equity. B. Issue a Writ of Certiorari and quash the enquiry report dated 14.07.2025 submitted by the 2nd respondent vide Annexure-B, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. The petitioner is a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act and the same is running educational institution. Initially, there were about 62 members. Since the members did not get actively involved and did not get the membership renewed, the membership of those members got terminated. Further, about 20 members expired and upon death of such members, their membership got terminated. Then respondent Nos.3 to 6 have filed separate complaints to the 1st respondent on 03.05.2025, 05.05.2025 and 14.05.2025 regarding the functioning of the petitioner Society. The 1st respondent based on the alleged complaint said to have been - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1074 WP No. 105993 of 2025 filed by respondent Nos.3 to 6 by order dated 06.06.2025 appointed respondent No.2 to conduct an inquiry into the affairs of the Society under Section 25 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act. 3. The respondent No.2 conducted the enquiry and submitted a report stating that as far as membership is concerned, there are certain discrepancies, further presently, there being no valid members, the existence of the petitioner Society itself is in question. So far as other aspects are concerned, there are no discrepancies found. The 1st respondent in pursuance of the enquiry report submitted by respondent No.2 without even taking note of the facts of the enquiry report and without there being any application of mind, not even accepting or rejecting the report has simply forwarded the same to the petitioner Society directing to initiate further proceedings. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. On 20.08.2025, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed an order, wherein it is observed that in view of the order dated 29.07.2025 passed in WP.No.104203/2025, the enquiry report has been mechanically forwarded by respondent No.1 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1074 WP No. 105993 of 2025 without application of mind and accordingly, the impugned order dated 21.07.2025 is stayed till the next date of hearing. 5. When the matter came up for hearing today, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the very same writ petition which is quoted in the interim order i.e., WP.No.104203/2025 was allowed by order dated 29.07.2025 and the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at paragraph Nos.7.6, 7.7 and 7.8 had observed as follows: “7.6. The fact that the Registrar can appoint any other person authorised by him in writing to conduct the enquiry does not mean that the enquiry made by such a person is automatically accepted by the Registrar. The person conducting the enquiry is only a delegate of the Registrar and does not substitute the Registrar himself. 7.7. Once, an enquiry has been made, it would be for the Registrar to apply his independent mind to the enquiry report and either accept or reject the said report, and if the report is rejected, a re-enquiry could also be ordered by the Registrar. 7.8. In that view of the matter, I answer the above point raised by holding that the Registrar of Societies in pursuance of an enquiry held by his delegate, appointed by him under subsection (1) of Section 25, cannot as a postman forward the enquiry report as received to the society, the registrar has to apply his mind, accept the report and then forward it to the society in terms of clause (3) in Section 25(2)(C)(iii).” - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1074 WP No. 105993 of 2025 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the said order, the writ petition may be allowed and the matter may be remanded back to respondent No.1 for considering the report and for passing appropriate orders. 7. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. The whole grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.1 basing on the report of respondent No.2, without application of mind has forwarded it to the petitioner Society which ought not to have been done. The said contention of the petitioner is strengthened by the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP.No.104203/2025 dated 29.07.2025. In the light of the observations made in paragraph Nos.7.6, 7.7 and 7.8, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the order dated 21.07.2025 bearing No.DRL/S.Sam/Bai.Vi/Kalam-25/C.R- 101/2025-26 passed by the 1st respondent vide Annexure-C, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to respondent No.1. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1074 WP No. 105993 of 2025 ii. The respondent No.1 shall consider the report of respondent No.2 in the light of the order passed by this Court and pass appropriate orders after providing due opportunity to all the concerned. iii. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. iv. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. Sd/- JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MEG CT: UMD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9