Back
Karnataka High Court
M.D.Nanaiah - Appellant
Versus
K.Nagaraju - Respondent
Decided On : 04-17-95
M.F.A. : 469 of 1995
Election - Karnataka State Government Employees' Association - Karnataka Societies Registration Act - Rule 14a, Rule 9 (iv) - The judgment discusses the violation of the interim order, the procedure for filling the Office of the President, and the powers of the Central Working Committee under Rule 9 (iv). It highlights the distinction between election and appointment to the office of President and the legal implications of the same.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiffs sought to cancel the election of the President of the Karnataka State Government Employees' Association, alleging violation of the order and filed for temporary injunction. The defendants contended that the election was held in accordance with the rules and no violation occurred.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Central Working Committee had the power to appoint the President under Rule 9 (iv) and that the meeting held on 22-1-1995 was for appointment, not election. The Court dismissed the applications and appeals, ruling in favor of the defendants.
Issues: Violation of interim order, distinction between election and appointment, power of the Central Working Committee under Rule 9 (iv), and the bona fide approach of the plaintiffs to the Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the Central Working Committee had the power to appoint the President under Rule 9 (iv) and that the meeting held on 22-1-1995 was not for election but for appointment. The Court also emphasized the importance of a bona fide approach when seeking ex parte orders.
Final Decision: All the appeals were allowed, and the applications were dismissed. The Court found no violation of the interim order and ruled in favor of the defendants.
( 2 ) M. F. A. No. 469/95 and M. F. A. No. 470/95 are filed against the order passed on I. A. No. IV, by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in O. S. No. 518/ 95. This is an application under Order 39, Rule 2a of the C. P. C. alleging violation of the order in I. A. No. 1 therein.
( 3 ) M. F. A. No. 471/5 is filed against the order passed on I. A. No. 1 in O. S. No. 848/ 95, by defendant No. 1 therein.
( 4 ) M. F. A. No. 472/95 is filed by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 against the order passed on I. A. No. III filed -in O. S. No. 518/95.
( 5 ) THE facts leading to the above appeals as alleged by the plaintiff is as follows: the 1st defendant in the suit "the Karnataka State Government Employees' Association" is an association registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act. It has its own rules and bye-laws to govern its affairs. On 29-10-1994, the elected President of the Association tendered his resignation. His term of office was to expire with 1997. According to the plaintiffs in the suit, the filling up of the Office of the President should be in accordance with Rule 14 (A) of the Rules and by virtue of the Rule 14a (2), the election of the President cannot be held at any place other than Bangalore. The 1st defendant in the suit has issued notice on 9-1-1995 to hold the meeting to elect the President on 22-1-1995 at Shimoga. Therefore, the plaintiffs who are members of the Central Working Committee filed the suit O. S. No. 518/95 seeking to cancel the calendar of events for the election to the Office of the President scheduled to be held on 22-1-1995 at Shimoga. Along with the suit, I. A. No. 1 was moved seeking temporary injunction restraining the defendants from holding the election to the Office of the President. On 21-1-1995, temporary injunction was granted by the VI Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City. According to the plaintiffs, the order was served on 22-1-1995 on the defendants in the suit. It is alleged that despite serving of the order, the election was held and the incumbent General Secretary of the 1st defendant Association in the suit, namely, Sri. K. Sippegowda, was elected as President. Therefore, they filed I. A. No. IV under Order 39, Rule 2a of the C. P. C. for proceeding against the defendants for taking action for disobeying the orders in I. A. No. I. The 2nd defendant in the suit was the Acting President, who, according to the plaintiffs, conducted the election in violation of the interim order. He was also proceeded under Rule 2a of Order 39. I. A. No. III was filed in O. S. No. 58/95 by the plaintiffs to restrain the 1st defendant who is elected as the President of the Association on 22-1-1995 in alleged violation of the order dated 21-1-1995 in I. A. No. I in O. S. No. 518/95 from functioning as the President.
( 6 ) THE defence contention, inter alia, was that on the tendering the resignation by the elected President, the vacancy was filled by directing the 2nd defendant, an elected Vice-President of the Association, to discharge the duties of the President, that the Central Working Committee of the 1st defendant Association met on 18-12-1994 and resolved to hold its next meeting on 22-1-1995, that the Central Working Committee can convene its meeting anywhere in the State, that due notice dated 9-1-1995 of the meeting was served on all the members of the Central Working Committee including the plaintiffs, that the agenda thereof showed that the meeting was convened to fill the Office of the President of the Association for the unexpired period invoking the provision of Rule 9 (iv) of the Rules. It being not a regular election of the President as contemplated under Rule 14 (A) of the Rules, there is no violation of the injunction order.
( 7 ) OVER ruling the contention of the defendants, the Court below has passed an order to detain defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in Civil Prison for a period of one mon
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
