IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.G. UMA
Aravinda M. Shastri S/O Mruthyunjaya Shashtri – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka Department Of Co-Operation – Respondent
ORDER :
M G UMA, J.
Heard Sri. Pruthvi Wodeyar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. Yogesh D Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 6 and Sri.A.Devaraj, learned counsel for respondent No.5 in WP No. 31520 of 2025 and Sri.Jai Prakash Reddy M, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Yogesh D Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents Nos.1, 3 and 4 and Sri. A.Devaraj, learned counsel for respondent No.2 in WP.No.31452/2025.
2. In WP.No.31520/2025, the petitioners being the members of respondent No.4- Society 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 of respondent No.4 - Society in the election scheduled to be held on 19.10.2025 as per the calendar of events at Annexure - B dated 30.09.2025 issued by respondent No.6.
In WP.No.31452/2025, the petitioners being the members of respondent No.5 - Society have approached this Court seeking issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 to 5 to include the name of the petitioners in the eligible voters list of respondent No.5 - Society in the elec
The court affirmed that judicial intervention is unwarranted when an alternative statutory remedy is available, specifically under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act.
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.
A writ petition should not be entertained when an alternative remedy exists under applicable statutes, directing parties to pursue such remedies first.
Court upheld the necessity for parties to first utilize available statutory remedies before seeking judicial intervention.
Writ petitions cannot be entertained when statutory remedies are available; alternative dispute mechanisms must be pursued.
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....
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 emphasized adherence to statutory procedures, allowing petitioners to invoke their rights under Section 70 of the KCS Act before seeking further judicial intervention.
Alternative remedies must be exhausted before invoking writ jurisdiction, reinforcing legislative provisions in the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.