Compliance with election procedures under statutory rules is essential, and eligibility disputes must be resolved independently of interim orders.

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 previous date directing the petitioners' vote to be counted, with certain conditions.

3. Considering the submission made at the Bar and after perusal of the records, this Court is of the view that the order dated 02.02.2024 is recalled and substituted by the following order:-

ORDER

(i) The writ petition is Allowed-in-part.

(ii) Returning Officer shall announce the results of the election to the Board of respondent - Society held on 25.01.2024 by counting the votes of the petitioners.

(iii) If any person entitled to raise a dispute under Section 70(2)(c) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, raises a dispute under the said provision questioning the eligibility of the petitioners to vote and contest in the election to the board of respondent-society, the said dispute shall be decided without being influenced by the interim order granted by this Court permitting the petitioners to vote and contest in the election to the board of respondent-society. It is made clear that this Court while granting interim order in favour of the petitioners, did not give any finding on the eligibility of the petitioners to vote and contest in the election to the board of the respondent-society.

(iv) The question as to the eligibility of the petitioners to vote and contest in the election is kept open to be decided in a dispute if any, raised in this regard.

(v) If any such dispute relating to the eligibility of the petitioners to vote and contest in the election to the board of respondent-Society is raised, the effect of holding the petitioners ineligible to vote and excluding such votes and excluding ineligible candidates on the final outcome of the election results shall also be taken into account before passing final orders.

(vi) The ballot papers containing the votes cast by the petitioners shall be kept in a separate sealed box after counting.

(vii) While counting the votes cast by the petitioners, a separate list shall be prepared disclosing the number of votes cast by the petitioners in favour of the candidates. Said list shall be separately maintained and be furnished to the authority, if summoned, while hearing election dispute in case such dispute is raised.