A delegate under different cooperative statutes can hold multiple voting rights without infringing the two-vote limit established by Section 21 of the Karnataka State Cooperative Societies Act, 1959.

ORDER :

M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.

Conglomeration of these writ petitions present a singular yet recurring question touching upon the very heart of cooperative democracy – namely, the legality of repeated delegation for the purpose of voting in the elections of a Federal Cooperative Institution. Though, the factual settings in each petition vary in their contours, the legal fulcrum upon which these petitions pivot remains common. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to notice the facts in each of the cases.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, brief facts in each of the cases are as follows:

2.1. In W.P.No.107749/2025, the petitioner is a Society, represented by the delegatee in the subject petition. He becomes the delegate to vote in the 7^th respondent’s ensuing elections. The challenge is to the delegatee of the 6^th respondent to cast his vote in the elections of the 7^th respondent-Kanara DCC Bank Ltd, Sirsi [KDCC]. It is the allegation of the petitioner that the said delegatee has already cast his vote as a delegatee in two other elections hitherto held and therefore, this delegation would form the third in line for the ensuing elections and therefore, there is a statutory bar in appointing a delegatee of the 6^th respondent for the third time for an election.

2.2. In W.P.No.107758/2025, it is preferred by another delegatee of Central Cooperative Wholesale Stores Limited again to stop the 6^th respondent from sending any delegate to vote in the 7^th respondent election. The legal grounds set out is the same that it is the third time, the 6^th respondent has delegated someone for the purpose of voting in the 7^th respondent.

2.3. In W.P.No.107803/2025, is now an admitted fact that the 6^th respondent is the delegatee of one Sangha which admittedly is the third in line. Therefore, two of the petitions noted hereinabove are contested and the law in regard to the third one is already declared by this Court.

3. The petitions raise a challenge to the nomination of delegates by certain cooperative societies to participate in elections of the 7^th respondent – Canara District Central Cooperative Bank Limited. The grievance of the petitioners is that the 6^th respondent, under different statutory enactments has already exercised its right of delegation on two prior occasions and that the present nomination constitutes a third delegation, thereby infringing the statutory embargo engrafted in Section 21 of the Karnataka State Cooperative Societies Act, 1959. The petitions are by the delegatee of Mahabaleshwara Cooperative Bank, calling in question the delegation of the delegatee of the 6^th respondent to stop him from voting in the ensuing elections of the 7^th respondent - Canara District Central Cooperative Bank Limited.

4. Heard the respective learned counsels representing the parties in each of these cases.

4.1. In W.P.No.107749/2025, heard Sri.G.R.Gurumath, learned Senior Counsel for Sri.Mallikarjunswamy Hiremath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt.Nandini Somapur, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5, Sri. Gurudass Kannur, learned Senior Counsel for Sri.Sourabh Hegde, learned counsel for respondent No.6, Sri.Vishwanath Hegde, learned counsel for respondent No.7.

4.2. In W.P.No.107758/2025, heard Sri.Raviraj C Patil, learned counsel for Sri.Mallikarjunswamy Hiremath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt.Nandini Somapur, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5, Sri.Aruna Shyam, learned Senior Counsel for Sri.Sourabh Hegde, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6, Si.Vishwanath Hegde, learned counsel for respondent No.7.

4.3. I