- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9348 WP No. 4655 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 4655 OF 2026 (CS-EL/M) BETWEEN: 1. LAKSHMI L W/O AMARESH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 349. 2. SHANKAR S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 60. 3. NANJUNDAPPA S/O HANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 303. SR. CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED 4. NAYARAYANAPPA S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 29 . SR. CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED 5. NAGABUSHAN V S/O VENKATAGIRIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 110. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9348 WP No. 4655 of 2026 6. MANJUNTH M S/O NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 343. 7. VENKATESH S/O DODDANARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 32. 8. CHANDRAPPA N S/O CHIKKANAYARANAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 24. 9. NAGARATHNAMMA W/O NARAYANAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 344. 10. MANJUNATH V S/O VENKATESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 145. 11. ANITHA S W/O RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, MEMBERSHIP NO. 351. PETITIONER Nos.1 TO 11 ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE TAMAKA MILK PRODUCERS CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. TAMAKA, KASABA HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT 563101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DEVIPRASAD SHETTY., ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9348 WP No. 4655 of 2026 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO OPERATION, M S BUILDING, DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE STATE CO OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY 3RD FLOOR, T T M C A BLOCK, SHANTHI NAGAR, BANGALORE 560 027. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, ELECTION OFFICER, NEXT TO KOLAR CHIKKABALAPURA DCC BANK, NO. 34/1, DISTRICT UNION BUILDING, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT 562101 4. RETURNING OFFICER TAMAKA MILK PRODUCERS CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., TAMAKA, KASABA HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT 563101 5. TAMAKA MILK PRODUCERS CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD TAMAKA, KASABA HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT 563101. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFIER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D NAIK, AGA FOR R1, R3 & R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9348 WP No. 4655 of 2026 DIRECT THE R2 TO R5 TO INCLUDE THE NAME OF THE PETITIONERS IN THE ELIGIBLE VOTERS LIST PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B AND PERMIT THE PETITIONERS TO CAST THEIR VOTES IN THE ELECTIONS TO THE R5 WHICH IS SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 14/02/2026 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER The petitioners, aggrieved by the inaction on the part of respondent No.4-the Returning Officer, wherein names of the petitioners were not shown in the voters’ list, filed this writ petition seeking a mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 to 5 to include the names of the petitioners in the voters’ list, and further direct respondent Nos.2 to 5 to allow the petitioners to vote and contest for elections of respondent No.5-Society, which are scheduled to be held on 14.02.2026 vide Annexure-A. 2. In the case of Bhimappa Vs. The Deputy Commissioner and Others1, this Court, a similar relief 1 WP No.148379/2020, disposed of on 03.11.2020 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9348 WP No. 4655 of 2026 was sought. This Court, vide order dated 03.11.2020, dismissed the writ petition referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Inderjit Barua and Others Vs. Election Commission of India2, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has, in paragraph No.3 of the judgment, held as follows: “3. 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 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 [(1969) 2 SCC 452 : (1970) 1 SCR 845 : AIR 1970 SC 340 : 42 ELR 325] . 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.” 2 (1985) 1 SCC 21 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9348 WP No. 4655 of 2026 The findings in the aforesaid judgment would clearly indicate that the Hon'ble Apex Court held that, there is a clear bar to any writ petition challenging the defect in electoral roll. 3. Further, this Court in the case of J. Robert Vs. Ram Jethmalani3 held that, even if there is an error in preparation of electoral roll, the same cannot be questioned before the High Court. As far as preparation of electoral roll, addition or deletion of names etc., are all the matters pertaining to the dispute relating to electoral roll and they cannot be entertained in the writ petition. 4. Considering the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court in the cases referred supra, the petitioners have no right to question the final electoral roll before the High Court in the writ jurisdiction. The High Court has no right in interfering in the process of election, as the election process has already commenced. 3 1990 SCC OnLine Kar 184 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9348 WP No. 4655 of 2026 5. In view of the above discussion, I do not find any grounds to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed reserving a liberty to the petitioners to raise their grievance before the appropriate forum, if so desired. 6. In view of dismissal of the petition, pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE PA CT:KHV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 25