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) 879

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU 
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ, J.
Venkatachalapathy J T S/o. J Thammaiah - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Karnataka Department Of Co-Operation - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 11684 Of 2025 (CS-EL/M)
Decided On : 02-05-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sri. Girish J, Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri.Yogesh D.Naik., AGA, Sri.T.L.Kiran Kumar., Advocate Sri.Deviprasad Shetty., Advocate

Disputes regarding voter eligibility in cooperative society elections must be adjudicated post-election under statutory provisions, not through writ petitions.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 - Writ Petition involving eligibility of voters - Interim orders allowed petitioners to vote, maintaining their votes in separate boxes pending resolution - Previous case law established that disputes regarding voter's eligibility under said Act must be resolved post-election - Current writ petition disposed, directing count including petitioners' votes - No opinion expressed on future disputes arising from election results. (Paras 1-4)

Findings of Court:
Writ Petition disposed with directions for outcome announcement within seven days, retaining votes in a separate box for potential disputes.

Issues: The primary issue was whether irregularities in the electoral process regarding voting eligibility could be resolved through a writ under Article 226 or required to follow statutory provisions under Section 70(2).

Ratio Decidendi: Election disputes regarding voter eligibility should be addressed following the outcomes post-election, not via writ petitions, affirming prior rulings on this issue.

Result: Writ Petition disposed.

Table of Content
1. interim orders regarding voting eligibility (Para 1)
2. irregularities in elections must be addressed post-results (Para 2 , 3)
3. directive 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 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