Back
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
Govindappa – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
Mr. Anant Ramanath Hegde, J. - This petition was disposed of vide order dated 02.02.2024. The petition is filed on the premise that the procedures contemplated under Rule 13-D(2-A) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules, 1960' for short) are not followed. This Court has granted interim order vide order dated 20.01.2024 and permitted the petitioners to cast vote in the election. Thereafter, notices were issued to the respondents and respondent-Society appeared and admitted that the requirements of Rule 13-D(2-A) Rules, 1960 are not complied. In this background, this Court has followed the law laid down in the case of H S Raju And Others v. State Of Karnataka And Others (2022(4) AKR 775) and allowed the writ petition in part. However, the final order signed by the Court turned out pertaining to another petition involving similar issues where the Society contested the petitioners' claim.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners has brought to the notice of this Court the error crept in and the learned counsel for the respondent-State as well as the Society would fairly submit that the petition was allowed-in-part on the previ
Compliance with election procedures under statutory rules is essential, and eligibility disputes must be resolved independently of interim orders.
The court affirmed the right to vote in co-operative society elections despite non-compliance with eligibility rules, allowing votes to be counted while keeping eligibility disputes open for future r....
Procedural non-compliance in election eligibility does not cure disqualification; eligibility disputes must be resolved under the relevant provisions of the Act.
The court ruled that procedural non-compliance does not automatically validate disqualified votes, and eligibility must be determined in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions.
The court held that non-attendance at meetings due to COVID-19 restrictions should not disqualify members from voting, affirming that disputes about eligibility typically fall under statutory provisi....
The court underscored that proper notice is mandatory for electoral eligibility, reinforcing that democratic processes must be transparent and participatory.
Judicial review is limited when alternative statutory remedies are available; petitioners permitted to vote but advised to pursue formal dispute under applicable law.
Participation in elections by individuals deemed ineligible does not invalidate election results if due process is followed, allowing courts to permit such participation.
The preparation of electoral rolls is integral to the election process, and disputes regarding eligibility must be resolved under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act, 1959.
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
