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.

ORDER :

Anant Ramanath Hegde, J. - Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State as well as the respondent/Society.

2. This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to include the names of the petitioners in the final eligible voters' list and permit the petitioners to vote in the election to the board of respondent No.5 - society which was scheduled on 07.01.2024.

3. This Court by way of interim order permitted the petitioners to cast vote in the said election. However, the result of the election was withheld.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the mandatory requirements of Rule 13-D(2-A) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 have not been followed while preparing the eligible and ineligible voters' list. Thus, it is urged that the petitioners should be treated as eligible voters' and their votes need to be counted as valid votes.

5. Learned counsel for the 5th respondent - Society would fairly submit that the Society has not followed the mandatory requirements of the aforementioned Rule.

6. At this juncture, it is brought to the notice of this Court that in similar circumstances, this Court in the case of HS Raju And Others v. State Of Karnataka And Others (2022 (4) AKR 775) has permitted the votes to be counted and the election results to be announced keeping open all other contentions to be adjudicated in appropriate forum under Section 70(2) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

7. It is relevant to note that merely because the petitioners were permitted to vote in the election to the board of the respondent-society, it does not mean that all the petitioners had the eligibility to vote in the election. It is quite possible that all or some had the eligibility to vote or may had incurred disqualification to vote. Merely because procedures contemplated under Rule 13-D(2-A) of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 are not followed, it does not mean that the disqualification if any incurred, is cured. Whether the petitioners did incur the disqualification to vote or not, is a question of fact. Same is to be decided in a proceeding under Section 70(2)(c) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

8. Hence, the following:

ORDER

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

(ii) Respondent No.6 - Returning Officer shall announce the results of the election to the Board of 5th respondent - Society held on 07.01.2024 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 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 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 in the election to the board of the respondent-society.

(iv) The question as to the eligibility of the petitioners to vote 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 in the election to the board of respondent-society is raised, the effect of holding the petitioners ineligible to vote and excluding such votes, on the final outcome of the election results shall also be taken into account before passing final orders.

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