- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13143 WP No. 37457 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 37457 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. ASHWATHAPPA S/O DODDATHIRUMALAPPA AGE-58 YEARS DIRECTOR. 2. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O JAYARAYAPPA AGE - 45 YEARS. 3. PRABHAKAR REDDY S/O NARAYANA REDDY AGE 43 YEARS. 4. SHIVAKUMAR S/O THIMMARAYAPPA AGE-47 YEARS. 5. ASHWATHAPPA S/O GUMMAIAH AGE- 55 YEARS. 6. ASHWTHANARAYANA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGE - 39 YEARS. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13143 WP No. 37457 of 2025 7. LAKSHMIDEVAMMA W/O NANJAREDDY AGE- 38 YEARS. 8. RAMACHANDRA S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA H.N. AGE- 45 YEARS THE PETITIONERS ARE ALL DIRECTORS OF HERENAGAVALLI MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES LTD. HERENAGAVALLI VILAGE AND POST CHIKKABALAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT. (THE PETITIONERS SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT-1959) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DEVIPRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION M.S BUILDING DR. B.R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL OFFICER AND EX-OFFICIO JOINT SECRETARY. 2. DEPUTY REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES CHIKKABALPURA SUB DIVISION CHIKKABALPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562101. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13143 WP No. 37457 of 2025 3. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES CHIKKABALPURA SUB DIVISION CHIKKABALPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562101. 4. INSPECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES OFFICE OF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES CHIKKABALPURA SUB DIVISION CHIKKABALPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562101. 5. HERENAGAVALLI MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES LTD HERENAGAVALLI VILLAGE AND POST CHIKKABALAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT. 562101 REPRESNTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECTIVE OFFICER. RESPONDENT NO.5 SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT-1959) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. VINAYAKA B., ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 TO APPOINT AN SPECIAL OFFICER BY INVOKING THE SECTION 31(1) OF THE KARNATAKA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 TO THE RESPONDENT NO.5 SOCIETY FORTH WITH. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13143 WP No. 37457 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. Deviprasad Shetty, learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri. Yogesh D Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent-State and Sri. Vinayaka B., learned counsel for the respondent No.5. 2. In the present writ petition, the petitioners have sought issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to appoint a Special Officer in terms of Section 31(1) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, in respect of respondent No. 5– Society. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioners that they are Directors of respondent No. 5–Society. The last election to the Managing Committee was held in the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13143 WP No. 37457 of 2025 year 2024 and the term of the said Committee is to expire in 2029. It is further stated that the petitioners have submitted their resignation to the Chief Executive Officer of the respondent No. 5–Society on 17.11.2025. On the said basis, the petitioners seek to invoke Section 31(1) of the Act for appointment of a Special Officer. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents and the learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the writ petition, contending that the petitioners themselves have already submitted their resignations and, therefore, the relief sought is not maintainable. 5. Having considered the averments made in the writ petition and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is well settled principle in law that a writ of mandamus would not lie - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13143 WP No. 37457 of 2025 in the absence of a prior demand and refusal. Unless the petitioners demonstrate that they have approached the competent authority seeking redressal of their grievance and that such request has been refused or not considered, invocation of the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not be justified. 6. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that it would not be appropriate to entertain the writ petition at this stage. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to approach the competent authority by way of a proper representation for redressal of their grievance, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 7. If such representation is submitted, the competent authority shall consider the same in - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13143 WP No. 37457 of 2025 accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation by the petitioners. 8. With the above observations and liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, pending interlocutory application(s), if any, do not survive for consideration. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20