SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Kar) 1183

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Alok Aradhe, S. Vishwajith Shetty, JJ.
N.H. Sripad Rao - Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka & Ors. - Respondents
W.A. No. 420 of 2022 (CS-RES), IN W.P. No. 243 of 2022 (CS-RES) C/W, W.A. No. 421 of 2022 (CS-RES), IN W.P. No. 233 of 2022 (CS-RES), in W.A. No. 420/2022 in W.P. No. 243/2022
Decided On : 29-07-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. K. Diwakara, Sr. Counsel, Mr. Hitesh Gowda B.J. Adv, for the Appellant; Mr. R. Subramanya, Addl. AG A/W, for the Respondents; Mrs. Vani H, AGA, for the Respondents Nos. 1-3 & 5; Mr. Jaya Kumar S. Patil, Sr. Counsel, Mr. Varun J. Patil, Adv, for the Respondents No. 12; Mr. Ashok Harnahalli, Sr. Counsel, Mr. Mahesh, Adv,, for the Appellant in W.A. No.420/2022 in W.P. No.243/2022; Mr. R. Subramanya, Addl. AG A/W Mrs. Vani H, AGA, for the Respondents Nos. 1-3 & 5 in W.A. No. 420/2022 in W.P. No. 243/2022; Mr. Jaya Kumar S. Patil, Sr. Counsel, Mr. A. Mahammed Tahir, Adv, for the Respondents No. 13 in W.A. No.420/2022 in W.P. No.243/2022

Challenges to elections should be made through the special remedy provided by the statute and not through the writ jurisdiction of the court under Article 226.

Headnote:

Election Disqualification - Cooperative Societies - Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, Section 47(2) - The court quashed the orders of disqualification and election of the appellants as President of the Milk Union and directed fresh elections. The court emphasized the importance of availing the special remedy provided by the statute for enforcing rights or liabilities created by it.

Fact of the Case:

The appeals arose from orders disqualifying respondents from cooperative society elections. The learned Single Judge quashed the disqualification orders and election of the appellants, directing fresh elections.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that challenges to elections should be made through the special remedy provided by the statute and not through the writ jurisdiction of the court under Article 226.

Issues: Interference with election proceedings through writ jurisdiction, challenge to election through special remedy provided by the statute.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that challenges to elections should be made through the special remedy provided by the statute and not through the writ jurisdiction of the court under Article 226.

Final Decision: The orders quashing the disqualification and election of the appellants were quashed, and respondents were granted the liberty to take recourse to the remedy provided to them in law. The appeals were disposed of.

JUDGMENT

1. These appeals arise out of orders dated 28.04.2022 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.No.233/2022 and W.P.243/2022. Since, common issue arise for consideration in these appeals, they were heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment. For the facility of reference, we shall advert to the facts involved in these appeals separately.

2. The respondent No.12 in W.A.No.420/2022 was elected Director of Kanchugaranahalli Milk Products Society (hereinafter referred to as 'the primary society' for short) . The aforesaid respondent is also an elected Director of respondent No.4, Shimoga, Davanagere and Chitradurga District Cooperative Milk Producers Union, Shimoga (hereinafter referred to as 'Milk Union' for short), which is sponsored by primary society. The respondent No.12 is also Vice President of the Milk Union. A notice dated 27.12.2021 was issued to aforesaid respondent fixing the date of appearance as 30.12.2021, which was affixed on the notice board of primary society at 8.30 p.m.

3. The respondent No.12 appeared on 30.12.2021 and sought time. However, the case was posted for 31.12.2021. On 31.12.2021, the petitioner filed an application seeking to engage the services of an Advocate. However, an order of disqualification dated 31.12.2021 was passed. The said order was neither communicated to respondent No.12 nor the primary society but the same was communicated to Managing Director of Milk Union.

4. The respondent No.12 challenged the order dated 31.12.2021 in a writ petition viz., W.P.No.243/2022. The respondent No.12 also sought a writ of certiorari for quashing the minutes of meeting dated 01.01.2022, wherein appellant was elected as President of the Milk Union. The said writ petition preferred by respondent No.12 was allowed by an order dated 28.04.2022 and the impugned order dated 31.12.2021 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies disqualifying respondent No.12 was quashed and election of the appellant as President to the Milk Union was quashed. The learned Single Judge further directed that election to the post of Milk Union shall be conducted expeditiously in accordance with law. In the aforesaid factual background, W.A.No.420/2022 has been filed.

5. The respondent No.13 in W.A.No.421/2022 was elected as a Director of Hirejambur Milk Producer Co-operative Society, Hirejumbu Post, Shikaipur Taluk Shimoga District (hereinafter referred to as 'the primary society' for short). Shimvaogga, Davanagere and Chitradurga District Cooperative Milk Producers Union, Shimoga (hereinafter referred to as 'Milk Union' for short), which is sponsored by primary society. The office of primary society fell vacant and election notice was issued on 04.11.2021 by which election was scheduled to be held on 20.11.2021.

6. The respondent No.13 along with one other Director filed W.P.No.20470/2021, in which an order of nomination of a person as Director was challenged. In the said writ petition, an interim order was granted on 18.11.2021. An order of disqualification was passed by the Assistant Registrar on 28.04.2017, which was challenged by the appellant in W.P.No.21342/2017, in which an ad interim order was granted. The aforesaid writ petition was subsequently dismissed by an order dated 17.11.2021 on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.

7. The Returning Officer by a communication dated 17.11.2011 sought a clarification whether the election to the post of President could be held as code of conduct was issued to holding the election to the Legislative council. The authority on the next date i.e., on 18.11.2021 clarified that code of conduct would not be an impediment in holding the election of President of office of Milk Union. Again on 18.11.2021 itself the Election Officer again sought a clarification with regard to postponement of election on the ground that elections to the post of Kannada Sahitya Parishad and Vokkaligara Sangha was likely to be held. The authority by a communication date

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top