Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.G. Uma, J.
B M Sugandhini W/o K.S.Manjunatha - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Karnataka Department Of Co-Operative – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 32515 of 2025 (CS-EL/M)
Decided On : 15-12-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seek inclusion in voter list. (Para 1) |
| 2. election held, petition may be infructuous. (Para 2) |
| 3. statutory remedy under kcs act available. (Para 3) |
| 4. writ petition dismissed; dispute can be raised. (Para 4) |
ORDER :
M G UMA, J.
The petitioners have approached this Court seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing respondent Nos.2 to 6 to include their names in the eligible voters list and permit them to cast their vote in the election, that is scheduled to be held on 02.11.2025 for respondent No.5 - Society.
2. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the election is already held on 02.11.2025. No interim order is passed in favour of the petitioners in the present case, except saying that the result of the election shall be subject to the final outcome of this writ petition. Under such circumstances, he submits that the writ petition has rendered infructuous.
3. It is noticed that there is statutory remedy available to the petitioners to raise the dispute under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act (for short, 'the KCS Act') before the appropriate authority. Under such circumstances, I do not find any reason to entertain this petition bypassing the statutory remedy.
4. In view of the above, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER :
i) The petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.
ii) The petitioners are at liberty to raise the dispute under Section 70 of the KCS Act, before the appropriate authority, in accordance with law, within ten days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
Writ petitions cannot be entertained when statutory remedies are available; alternative dispute mechanisms must be pursued.
Court emphasized the necessity to pursue alternative remedies under Section 70 of the KCS Act before seeking judicial intervention.
Courts will not entertain petitions if alternative remedies are available, emphasizing the need to exhaust such remedies before seeking judicial intervention.
Court upheld the necessity for parties to first utilize available statutory remedies before seeking judicial intervention.
The court affirmed that judicial intervention is unwarranted when an alternative statutory remedy is available, specifically under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act.
The court emphasized adherence to statutory procedures, allowing petitioners to invoke their rights under Section 70 of the KCS Act before seeking further judicial intervention.
Judicial review is limited when alternative statutory remedies are available; petitioners permitted to vote but advised to pursue formal dispute under applicable law.
The court upheld that petitioners must utilize the alternative remedy under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, dismissing the writ petition challenging the ineligible voters list....
A writ petition should not be entertained when an alternative remedy exists under applicable statutes, directing parties to pursue such remedies first.
Alternative remedies must be exhausted before invoking writ jurisdiction, reinforcing legislative provisions in the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act.
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
