Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
PRASANNA B. VARALE, KRISHNA S DIXIT, JJ.
Mysore And Chamarajanagar District Co-Operative Bank Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Karnataka, Department Of Co-Operation – Respondent
Writ Appeal No.1333 of 2023 (CS-EL of M) C of W Writ Appeal Nos.1300 of 2023, 1322 of 2023, 1348 of 2023, 1391 of 2023, 1392 of 2023
Decided on : 02-01-2024
Election Notifications - Challenge to Conduct Elections - Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, Sections 28-A(4), 29-F(4), 27-B(e), 39-AA(15), 39-A, 39-AA, 28-B(1), 28-A(5), 28-B(3), Rule 13-D(1), 13-D(2), 13-D(2-A), 13-D(5), 29-G(4), 29-C(3), 13-E(1), 13-E(2)(i), 14(1) - The court discussed the statutory scheme for holding elections to the Board of District Cooperative Banks, emphasizing the importance of preparatory work and the mandatory timelines for conducting elections. The court highlighted the duty of the Election Officer to send a consolidated list of all co-operative societies in the District wherein elections are due in advance, the obligation of the Board of every co-operative society to inform the CEA about the expiry of its term, and the duty of the Chief Executive of the society to prepare electoral rolls and lists of eligible and ineligible voters. The court also emphasized the consequences of failing to hold elections within the prescribed timeline, including automatic disqualification of Board members and the appointment of an Administrator.
Fact of the Case:
The appeals sought to challenge a learned Single Judge’s orders directing the conduct of elections to the Board of Cooperative Banks in a time-bound way and not to disqualify the board members from electoral participation. The cases involved the recall of Election Notifications and the subsequent postponement of intended elections due to the unaccomplished preparatory work. The State and the Co-operative Election Authority opposed the writ petitions, contending that the lists of eligible voters, ineligible voters, and defaulters were prerequisites for conducting elections. The court directed the expeditious and time-bound holding of elections and mandated the DCC Banks to cooperate in the conduct of elections. The office bearers/Board Members of these Banks were directed to cooperate with the CEA in the smooth conduct of elections.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Election Notifications were recalled due to the unaccomplished preparatory work, and the subsequent postponement of elections was justifiable. The court also found that the automatic disqualification of Board members for failing to hold elections within the prescribed timeline did not have textual support in the relevant provisions of the Act. The court restrained the disqualification of the Board members from contesting in the ensuing election and directed the expunction of adverse remarks made against the Co-operative Election Authority.
Issues: The issues involved the challenge to the recall of Election Notifications, the automatic disqualification of Board members, and the adverse remarks made against the Co-operative Election Authority.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Election Notifications were rightly recalled due to the unaccomplished preparatory work, and the automatic disqualification of Board members for failing to hold elections within the prescribed timeline did not have textual support in the relevant provisions of the Act. The court also emphasized the importance of conducting elections to the Boards of DCC Banks expeditiously, while permitting marginal relaxation of the timelines prescribed by the extant Rules.
Final Decision: The court directed the conduct of elections to the Boards of DCC Banks preferably within an outer limit of eight weeks, and for that all the stakeholders including the Government shall take facilitative steps. The jurisdictional Administrator(s) were directed to take over the functions of the Boards of the Appellant – Cooperative Banks, if already not taken, forthwith. All adverse remarks/comments appearing in the impugned judgments qua the Cooperative Election Authority were treated as having been expunged.
JUDGMENT :
All these intra-court appeals seek to lay a challenge to a learned Single Judge’s orders dated 10.10.2023 & 12.10.2023, whereby a direction has been issued to conduct elections to the Board of Cooperative Banks in a time bound way/expeditiously. A direction is also issued not to disqualify the board members from electoral participation.
(i) The order dated 10.10.2023 has been rendered in a batch of cases i.e., W.P.No.20333/2023 (CS-EL-M) C/w W.P.No.20340/2023 (CS-EL-M), W.P.No.20353/2023 (CS-EL-M) W.P.No.20458/2023 (CS-EL-M) and W.P.No.22296/2023 (CS-EL-M). The order dated 12.10.2023 has been rendered in W.P.No.21325/2023 (CS-EL-M) c/w W.P.No.21356/2023 (CS-EL-M) and W.P.No.21461/2023 (CS-EL-M).
(ii) The two companion appeals i.e., W.A.No.1391/2023 & W.A.No.1392/2023 are instituted by non-parties to the above writ petition challenging the aforesaid order dated 12.10.2023, to the extent it permits the members of the Board of the Cooperative Bank concerned. They have sought for leave of the court to prosecute these appeals.
II. Brief fact matrix of these cases:
(a) Elections for constituting the managerial bodies of the two co-operative banks were intended by the issuance of subject Notifications dated 08.08.2023 & 01.09.2023 (herein after ‘the Election Notifications’). They were issued by the jurisdictional Election Officers under Rule 14(1) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960. However, these Notifications came to be recalled by the subsequent Notifications (hereafter ‘the Withdrawal Notifications’), and resultantly the intended elections stood postponed, indefinitely. This withdrawal is inter alia on the ground that the list of Eligible Voters, list of Ineligible Voters & list of defaulters were not prepared, the same being a pre-requisite. W.P.Nos.20333/2023, 20340/2023, 20353/2023 & 20458/2023 had been filed for challenging the Withdrawal Notifications. Two members of a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society had filed W.P.No.22296/2023 seeking a direction for conducting the elections after complying all the provisions of law.
(b) After service of notice, the State & the Co-operative Election Authority (hereafter ‘CEA’) having entered appearance through their advocates opposed the writ petitions inter alia contending that for conducting elections, the lists of Eligible voters, Ineligible voters & defaulters are a sine qua non; since these lists were not prepared by the Chief Executives of the DCC Banks concerned, and this fact being noticed subsequently, the Withdrawal Notifications came to be issued for facilitating the preparation & publication of those lists in a time line prescribed by the extant Rules.
(c) Learned Single Judge having clubbed & heard all the writ petitions, directed expeditious/time bound holding of elections and the DCC Banks have been mandamused to cooperate in the conduct of elections.
The office bearers/Board Members of these Banks are directed to co-operate with the CEA in the smooth conduct of elections. Further, a direction has also been issued interdicting the electoral disqualification of the Board Members.
III. A Brief description of statutory scheme for holding election inter alia to the Board of District Cooperative Banks:
a) Section 28-A(4) of the 1959 Act prescribes the term of Members of the Board to be five years reckoned from the date of election. Section 29-F(4) prescribes the term of Office Bearers of the Co-operative Society to be five years from the date of their election and that it shall be co-terminus with the term of the Board. Section 27-B(e) enjoins upon the Board of Society to file a declaration regarding the date of conduct of elections when due, within six months of the close of every co-operative year i.e., 31st day of March. Section 39-AA(15) obligates the Bo
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of conducting elections to the Boards of DCC Banks in a time-bound way and the lack of textual support for the automatic disqualific....
Compliance with statutory election procedures within cooperative societies is mandatory to ensure valid electoral processes; neglecting to notify ineligible voters invalidates election actions.
The preparation of electoral roll under Rule 13-D(2-A) is an integral part of the election process, and the writ petition to challenge the electoral roll on the ground of non-compliance with Rule 13-....
The court reaffirmed that administrative actions must adhere to proper legal procedures and that arbitrary withdrawal of electoral notifications without just cause constitutes legal malice, disruptin....
The court affirmed that delays in co-operative elections due to concurrent parliamentary elections are legitimate, provided the election process is statutorily followed.
The judgment clarified the limited grounds for interference with an election process and emphasized that the Registrar's authority does not extend to directing re-scrutiny of rejected nominations.
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
