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) 722

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
M. Nagaprasanna, J.
Karur Milk Producer Co-Operative Society Limited-Karur - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Karnataka, Department Of Co-Operation And Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No.103589 of 2024 (CS – EL/M), Writ Petition No.103590 of 2024 (CS – EL/M), Writ Petition No.106546 of 2024 (CS – EL/M)
Decided On : 02-06-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri Jayakumar S.Patil, Sr.Advocate A/W, Smt.Vidyavati M.Kotturshettar, Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri J.M.Gangadhar, Aag, Sri Harish S.Maigur, Advocate, Sri Prabhuling Navadagi, Sr.Advocate A/W Sri M.B.Hiremath, Advocate For, Sri G.V.Bharamagoudar, Advocate

The election process for cooperative societies, once commenced, cannot be halted based on conflicting government orders; elections must proceed from the stage they were interrupted.

Headnote:(A) Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 - Section 12(2), Section 20, Section 28A - Election process for cooperative societies - Petitions challenging the calendar of events issued by the Returning Officer and seeking to quash a government order regarding elections - Petitioners claimed violation of government directives regarding election procedures and board representation - Respondents contended that the election process, once commenced, could not be halted, and earlier court decisions supported ongoing elections despite procedural irregularities. (Paras 2-16)

(B) Legal principles on authority and electoral procedure - Court underscored that elections cannot be stalled once initiated; directives must be construed in context to uphold democratic processes. Acknowledging challenges posed by conflicting government orders, the court determined elections can proceed based on previously issued final voters list. (Paras 10.1, 11)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners challenged the issuance of the calendar of events for elections to cooperative societies, claiming violations of existing laws and government orders that specify how elections should be conducted. (Paras 2-5)

Findings of Court:
The court found that since the election process had commenced with the publication of the final voters list, the issuance of the calendar of events was appropriate, and the election must proceed as per the applicable government orders. (Paras 15-16)

Issues: Whether the election process had commenced according to law and government orders, and if the actions of the Returning Officer were lawful.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that existing government orders allowing elections from previously halted stages are binding; thus, elections can proceed despite previous procedural non-compliance.

Result: Petitions rejected, election process to continue as per directives.

Table of Content
1. petitioners challenge election orders and seek directions. (Para 1 , 2)
2. background on cooperative societies and election procedures. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. government orders affecting election timelines and procedures. (Para 7 , 8)
4. arguments on the legality of the election calendar issuance. (Para 9)
5. court's analysis of government orders and election processes. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
6. final decision on the petitions and election continuation. (Para 15)
7. petitions rejected; election process to continue as per orders. (Para 16)

ORDER :

M. Nagaprasanna, J.

The petitioners, in W.P.Nos.103589 of 2024 and 103590 of 2024 call in question calendar of events so issued on 20-06-2024 by the 5th respondent and seek a consequential direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to hold elections strictly in consonance with the Government Order dated 05-06-2024 and corrigendum to the said order dated 13-06-2024 and a further mandamus is sought to direct the 5th respondent not to permit casting of any vote and contest the voters in the societies that are the subject matter of the petitions.

W.P.No.106546 of 2024 is filed seeking to quash the Government Order dated 05-06-2024 and the corrigendum to the said order dated 13-06-2024 and also seeking a mandamus to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to conduct elections to the 5th respondent Union from the stage it was stopped.

2. Heard Sri Jayakumar S. Patil, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.103589 of 2024, Sri M R Rajagopal, learned counsel appearing for petitioners in W.P.Nos.103590 of 2024 and 106546 of 2024; Sri J.M. Gangadhar, Additional Advocate General for respondents 1, 4, 5 and 7 in W.P.No.103589 of 2024 and respondents 1, 4, 5 and R8 in W.P.No.103590 of 2024 and respondent No.1 in W.P.No.106546 of 2024; Sri G.V. Bharamagoudar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 in all the petitions, Sri Harish S. Maigur, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 in W.P.Nos.103589 and 103590 of 2024 and respondent No.5 in W.P.No.106546 of 2024; and Sri M.B. Hiremath and Sri Prabhuling Navadagi, learned senior counsel appearing for respondents 8 to 11 in w.P.No.103589 of 2024 and respondents 9 to 14 in W.P.No.103590 of 2024.

3. Before embarking upon consideration of cases at hand, I deem it appropriate to notice the protagonists in these petitions. In Writ Petition No.103589 of 2024 and Writ Petition No.106546 of 2024 petitioners are Karur Milk Producers Cooperative Society Limited, Karur and Nandhi Bevuru Milk Producers Cooperative Society Limited, Nandhi Bevuru respectively. Petitioner in Writ Petition No.103590 of 2024 is a private individual. The respondents are the State of Karnataka and officers of the Department of Co- operation. The 5th respondent in W.P.Nos.103589 and 103590 of 2024 and 4th respondent in W.P.No.106546 of 2024 are common, the Returning Officer/ Assistant Commissioner, Ballary District. There are other private respondents whose description would not be required to be specifically noticed.

4. Facts, in brief, adumbrated are as follows:

On 24-04-1976, it appears, the Society in W.P.No.103589 of 2024 comes into existence. The 6th respondent, the Raichur Bellary Koppal and Vijayanagar District Milk Producers Cooperative Societies Union Limited was renamed as the 6th respondent after the newly formed District of Vijayanagar. Pursuant to the order of the 4th respondent/Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies dated 09-11-2022, the bye-laws of the 6th respondent newly named Society were amended under Section 12(2) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act , 1959 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). Despite the 6th respondent being a federal Society, the number of Directors remained as 12 and the averment in the petitions is that it was in violation of Section 28A of the Act which mandates that for a federal society the number of Directors should be 21. A notice is issued on 16-09-2023 in terms of

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