- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22510 WP No. 16000 of 2023 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. 16000 OF 2023 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. PADUBIDRI CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY (N) PADUBIDRI, SAHAKARA SANGAMA N H 66 KAUP TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT 574111 (A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER KCS ACT 1959) REP BY ITS PRESIDENT Y SUDHIR KUMAR AGE : 62 YEARS 2. RASOOL Y G S/O SHEIK HAROON AGED 86 YEARS DIRECTOR OF FIRST PETIONER SOCIETY R/O NO 5-11, GOLSHAN BAUGH NEAR CANARA BANK, TENKA YERAMAL UDUPI 574119 3. RAJARAM RAO W/O SANJEEVA RAO AGED 59 YEARS DIRECTOR OF THE FIRST PETIONER SOCIETY R/O 8-86-1, SRI VINAYAKA BENGRE PADUBIDRI 574111, UDUPI DISTRICT 576107 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MAHESH R UPPIN.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO OPERATION Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22510 WP No. 16000 of 2023 VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGAULRU 560001 REP BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE REGISRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES IN KARNATAKA NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD BENGALURU 560052 3. THE ASST REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES KUNDAPURA SUB DIVISION SANJEEVA PRABHU BUILDING MASTIKATTE, KUNDAPURA UDUPI DISTIRCT 576201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.YOGESH D NAIK - AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDERS DTD.17/03/2023 BEARING NO. RCS/CRD/KME-3/21/2022-23 PASSED BY THE R-2 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A, THE LETTER DTD 11/07/2023 BEARING RCS/CRD/KME-3/21/22-23 ISSUED BY THE R-2 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-E AND THE ORDER DTD 11/07/2023 BEARING NO. RCS/CRD/KME-3/21/2022-23 PASSED BY THE R-2 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-F BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER NO.1 IS CONCERNED AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22510 WP No. 16000 of 2023 ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this petition, the petitioners are seeking writ of certiorari to quash Order dated 17.03.2023 passed by respondent No.2 at Annexure-A to the writ petition. 3. Sri Mahesh R Uppin, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that, perusal of Annexures- D and E would indicate that the respondent- authorities have made it mandatory to implement Section 129-A of the Karnataka Co- operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for brevity) so as to adopt the Model Bye-laws and in this regard, learned counsel places reliance on the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.16067 of 2023 disposed of on 28.08.2025. Accordingly sought for an identical order in this writ petition. 4. Per contra, Sri Yogesh D Naik, learned AGA refers to Section 129-A(3) of the Act and submitted that, it is the duty of the Society to implement Section 129-A of the Act. Accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. I have considered the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and carefully examined the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22510 WP No. 16000 of 2023 reasons assigned in Annexures- D and E to the writ petition wherein the respondent-Authorities have directed the petitioner-Society to implement Section 129A of the Act. In this regard, it is relevant to extract paragraphs No.6 and 7 of the W.P.No.16067 of 2023 disposed of on 28.08.2025, which reads as under : "6. The impugned proceedings have emanated by virtue of the powers vested in the respondents under Section 129A of the Act of 1959. The petitioners have not challenged the vires of Section 129 of the Act of 1959. Be that as it may, a reading of Section 129A of the Act of 1959 makes it more than evident that the Co- operative Society is at liberty to adopt model bye-laws with or without modification, which thereby means that the model bye-laws which suits the petitioner No.1 could alone be incorporated and adopted. Therefore, the apprehension of the petitioner No.1 that by adopting model bye-laws, its constitution would be affected, is misplaced. The petitioner No.1 is at liberty to pick up only those bye-laws from the model bye-laws, which are suitable for its existence and operation and whatever that does not suit the petitioner No.1 or its business, the same may not be adopted. If the petitioner No.1 has any grievance, it may approach the Registrar as provided under Section 129A(3) of the Act of 1959 and seek appropriate reliefs from the Registrar. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22510 WP No. 16000 of 2023 7. The writ petition stands disposed off on the above terms. The petitioner No.1 is at liberty to place the adopted model bye-laws before the Annual General Meeting and proceed in accordance with law." 8. In that view of the matter, without going into the merits of the case, by following the declaration of law made by this Court in W.P.No.16067 of 2023 (supra), the petitioner-Society is at liberty to place the Adopted Model Bye-laws before the Annual General Meeting and proceed in accordance with law. With this observation, writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE RS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 44