Back
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
Ambareesha – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
Mr. Anant Ramanath Hegde, J. - Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State, learned advocate appearing for the Co-operative Election Authority and learned advocate appearing for the respondent-society.
2. This writ petition is essentially 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 and contest in the election to the board of respondent - society which was scheduled on 21.01.2024.
3. This Court by way of interim order permitted the petitioners to cast vote and permitted to file nomination paper to contest 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 respondent - Society disputes the claim of th
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 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....
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....
Compliance with election procedures under statutory rules is essential, and eligibility disputes must be resolved independently of interim orders.
The court affirmed that judicial intervention is unwarranted when an alternative statutory remedy is available, specifically under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act.
Judicial review is limited when alternative statutory remedies are available; petitioners permitted to vote but advised to pursue formal dispute under applicable law.
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.
Election eligibility disputes under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act must be resolved post-election results, not via writ petitions under Article 226.
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
