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) 447

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU 
Suraj Govindaraj, J.
Mrs. Devamma, W/o. Shivamadegowda and ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Karnataka, Department Of Co-Operation and ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 13588 of 2025 (CS-EL/M)
Decided On : 12-06-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri. Sathya M.N., Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, Aga, Sri. T.L. Kiran Kumar, Advocate

Electoral eligibility disputes in cooperative society elections must be resolved post-election results through proper legal channels, rather than through interim measures.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 - Election irregularities - Court allowed ineligible voters to cast votes, maintaining them in separate ballot boxes, while decisions on eligibility must follow after election results in disputes under Section 70(2). (Paras 2-4)

(B) Finality of Rulings - Previous case law established that irregularities in election conduct should be resolved post-election results through the proper legal forum. (Paras 2 and 3)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners declared ineligible voters were permitted to vote in society elections subject to the writ petition's outcome, with measures ensuring the integrity of the voting process.

Findings of Court:
Writ Petition disposed of, directing results to be declared within seven days, while reserving the right to challenge the outcomes based on future disputes as per the law.

Issues: The primary issue was whether procedural irregularities related to electoral eligibility could be remedied through a writ or required to follow specific statutory provisions post-result announcements.

Ratio Decidendi: Elections disputes regarding eligibility should be addressed through lawful processes following the election results as established in the referenced decision, emphasizing that previous rulings not being challenged carry weight.

Result: Writ Petition disposed of.

Table of Content
1. voter eligibility conditional on writ petition outcome. (Para 1)
2. election disputes must adhere to the co-operative societies act. (Para 2 , 3)
3. court orders on election 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 came to a categorical conclusion that any irregularity in the conduct of election in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not be the proper remedy of 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.

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 time frame 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