The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appeal provided to the General Body under Section 21 of the Souharda Act was hardly an effective and efficacious remedy, and the provision was misused by the majority of the Directors to remove their detractors, acting against the spirit of co-operative movement.

JUDGMENT :

R. Devdas, J.

These appeals arise out of a common order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.29029/2012 and connected matters, which were disposed of on 12.01.2015.

2. The appellants are founder members/promoters of the 2nd respondent Co-operative Bank, which was established in the year 1998. The Bank was initially registered under the provisions of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act,1959 and subsequently registered under the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act,1997 (hereinafter referred as the 'Souharda Act'). The appellants were taken to the Board of the Bank, unanimously as special invitees. Subsequently, on being elected, the appellants were holding the post of Directors. The 1st appellant was also elected thrice, continuously as the President of the Bank. After resigning to the post of Director and President, respectively, the appellants continued as ordinary members of the Bank. On 30.12.2010, the Board of the Bank, by passing a resolution, removed the appellants from the membership of the Bank. Being aggrieved, the appellants raised a dispute before the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (hereinafter referred to as 'JRCS' for short) under Section 39 of the Souharda Act.

3. On consideration of the preliminary objections raised by the Bank that a dispute under Section 39 was not maintainable against an order of cancellation of membership, the JRCS, upheld the objections and dismissed the dispute, on 10.03.2011. The appellants preferred W.P.Nos.9627 and 9628/2011, challenging the validity of section 21 of the Souharda Act. Section 21 provides for an appeal before the General Body of the Co-operative Society/Bank, on an order of cancellation of membership. Simultaneously, appeals were preferred before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, calling in question the order passed by the JRCS.

4. In the writ petitions, when interim relief was not granted, appeals in Writ Appeals No.1901 and 1902/2011 were preferred before this Court. By order dated 16.03.2011, this Court disposed of the writ appeals directing the appellants to avail appellate remedy as provided under Section 21 of the Act. An SLP preferred by the appellants in SLP No.15184/2011, was also dismissed by order dated 05.07.2011. Review Petition in R.P.No.343/2011 was also dismissed on 03.11.2011.

5. In the meanwhile, the appellants approached the General Body, as provided under Section 21. The General Body, having met on 17.04.2011, reiterated the decision of canceling the membership of the appellants. The appeal before the Tribunal also came to be dismissed on 09.03.2012. Challenging the order of the General Body, W.P.No.26773/2012 was filed by the second appellant herein. The vires of Section 21 of the Souharda Act was also called in question. The supporters of the appellants also preferred writ petitions, including the first appellant herein, in W.P.No.26771/2012. However, it is relevant to notice that by Amendment Act, 2012, Section 21 of the Souharda Act was deleted with effect from 11.02.2013.

6. By order dated 12.01.2015, the learned Single Judge disposed of all the writ petitions by a common order, directing the respondent-Bank to prepare a list of voters who are eligible as on the date of the order and those who have not completed 18 months from the date of admission of their membership were not allowed to participate in the General Body meeting which would decide the consideration of the appeal filed by the appellants herein, challenging the resolution dated 31.12.2010, by which the appellants were removed from primary membership of the respondent-Bank.

7. Though the instant writ appeals were filed on 02.03.2015, challenging the order of the learned Single Judge, the General Body of the respondent-Bank met on 29.03.2015 to reconsider the appeal preferred by the appellants herein and once again affirmed the resolution dated 31.12.2010. Some of the appeals preferred by the supporters of the appellants herein, in W.A.Nos.851 to 854/2015 and W.ANos.2