SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 118

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU 
Suraj Govindaraj, J.
Smt Yashodamma K S, W/o Y B Siddaramegowda And Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Karnataka Department Of Co-Operative And Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 15287 of 2025 (CS-RES)
Decided On : 04-07-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri. Puttaraju H B.,Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri. Yogesh D. Naik., Aga, Sri. T.L. Kiran Kumar., Advocate, Sri. B. Ravindra Prasad., Advocate

Electoral disputes regarding voter eligibility should be addressed under statutory provisions rather than through writ petitions, preserving the integrity of election processes.

Headnote:(A) KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 - Section 70(2) - Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ Petition regarding eligibility of voters - Petitioners initially permitted to vote with their votes kept separate - Court reiterates that disputes over eligibility should follow procedures outlined in Section 70(2) after election results - Prior decision in H.S.Raju case cited as applicable - Writ petition disposed of and Returning Officer directed to announce results. (Paras 2, 4)

(B) Election Disputes - Irregularities in elections should be addressed under specific statutory provisions rather than through writ petitions, ensuring orderly conduct of electoral processes. (Paras 2, 3)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners were declared ineligible voters but were allowed to vote in society elections under interim orders, with their votes kept separate pending the outcome of the writ petition.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the Returning Officer to announce election results considering the votes of the petitioners and maintained open consideration for any disputes arising under Section 70(2) of the Act.

Issues: The main issue was the proper remedy for addressing voter eligibility disputes and the appropriate legal pathway to challenge electoral irregularities.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that electoral disputes regarding eligibility should be pursued under the provisions of relevant statutes rather than initiating writ petitions, to maintain electoral integrity.

Result: Writ Petition disposed of.

Table of Content
1. permission for ineligible voters to cast votes. (Para 1)
2. irregularities in elections should be addressed post-results. (Para 2 , 3)
3. court’s order regarding results and retention of votes. (Para 4)

ORDER :

Suraj Govindaraj, J.

1. This Court by way of various interim orders had permitted the petitioners who were declared to be ineligible voters to cast their vote in the elections of the Society, subject to the result of the writ petition and that the votes cast by the petitioners shall be kept in separate ballot boxes.

2. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of H.S.Raju vs. State of Karnataka & others, [W.P.No.8502/2022 dated 7.6.2022] has after considering the matter in detail come to a categorical conclusion that any irregularity in the conduct of election a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not be the proper remedy any dispute as regards the eligibility or ineligibility and the deficiencies in finalization of final electoral list, could only be considered in a dispute raised as regard the election under Section 70 (2) of the KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT , 1959 after the announcement of the results by counting even the votes cast by the petitioners.

3. The said judgment not having been challenged and having attained finality, the fact being more or less similar would equally apply to the present matter.

4. In that view of the matter, I pass the following:

ORDER

i. The Writ Petition is disposed of ii. The Returning Officer is directed to announce the result within seven days of the receipt of a copy of this order by taking into account the votes cast by the petitioners in the above matter.

iii. In the event of any proceeding being filed in relation to the results of the election under Section 70 (2) of the KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT , 1959, all the contentions raised herein and any that may be raised are left open for consideration in accordance with the applicable law, this court has not expressed any opinion on those issues.

iv. The votes cast by the respective petitioners which had been directed to be kept in separate box shall continue to be retained in a separate box until the disposal of the dispute if any raised within the timeframe prescribed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top