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) 3004

2025 KHC-D 14430
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
Ninbavva Suresh Shinge – Appellant 
Versus
The State of Karnataka – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 107862 of 2025
Decided On : 28-10-2025
Advocates Appeared : 
For the Appellants : Jagadish Patil, Sajid Goodwala
For the Respondents : Ramesh Chigari, Sanjana S. Mudhol, G.V. Bharamagouda

Procedural deficiencies in electoral roll preparation require adherence to due process, ensuring inclusion of all valid votes prior to final election results.

Headnote:(A) Co-operative Societies Act - Section 70(2) - Co-operative Societies Rules - Rule 13-D(2-A) - Election process - Deficiencies in finalization of electoral roll and lack of individual notices to excluded members found to violate procedural safeguards - The court held that the election results must include the votes of the petitioners, ensuring no violation of rights occurs. (Paras 10-12)

(B) Election process - The preparation of the voters list is integral to the election process, and deficiencies admitted by respondents require rectification prior to final results being announced. (Paras 8-9)

Facts of the case:
The writ petitions contest the exclusion of certain members from the electoral roll, claiming their votes were not considered due to deficiencies in notice and finalization processes.

Findings of Court:
The election results must include the votes cast by the petitioners, despite admitted deficiencies in the electoral roll preparation, leaving open the possibility of future disputes.

Issues: The central issue was whether the absence of individual notice to excluded members justified the inclusion of their votes in the election results.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that due process in the preparation of the electoral roll cannot be overlooked, and fair opportunity must be given to all affected members prior to announcing election results.

Result: Writ petitions disposed of, directing the Returning Officer to announce results, including the petitioners' votes.

ORDER :

1. Learned counsel appearing for the parties in unison would submit that, the issue in the lis stands covered by judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.8502/2022 C/w. W.P. No.8477/2022, disposed off on 7th June 2022. The Coordinate Bench of this Court held as follows:

“8. In the light of these rival submissions, the question for consideration is:

Whether these writ petitions must be disposed of directing the Returning Officer [the fourth respondent and sixth respondents in the respective petitions to announce the results of the elections held on 23.04.2022 including the votes cast by the petitioners.

9. The provisions of Rule 13-D (2-A) of the Rules read as hereunder:

(3) The Election Officer shall take steps for publication of voters list in the following manner, namely:-

(a) for publication of draft eligible electoral list, a list of defaulters, a list of members whose repayment falls due, before the election date clear fifty days;

(b) for calling objections, if any, calling upon the defaulter members to repay the amounts due to the co-operative societies on or before thirty clear days prior to the date of election;

(c) the scrutiny and verification of the voters list after payment by defaulters etc., clear twenty days before the ate of election.

(d) for publication of final eligible voters list before fifteen clear days prior to the date of election. The underlining is by this Court.

10. These provisions do not leave any room for doubt that an excluded member, with the publication of the Draft Eligible Electoral List, must have an opportunity by way of an individual notice to file objections on exclusion from the Electoral List. It must be shown that the concerned Chief Executive has prepared and sent notice to the affected members. The Public Notice dated 8.11.2021, does not meet these requirements. In fact, it is admitted on behalf of the respondents that there are deficiencies in the preparation of the Final Electoral Roll after the publication of the Draft Eligible Electoral List and the petitioners have not been issued with individual notices.

11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shri Sant Sadguru Janardan Swami (Moingiri Maharaj) Sahakari Dugha Utpadak Sanstha and Another v. State of Maharashtra and Others supra has held as follows:

‘7. A perusal of the Rules discloses that the preparation of provisional list of voters, filing of objection against the provisional list of voters, consideration of the objection by the Collector and finalising the list of voters, all occur in the Rules which cover the entire process of the election. The Rules framed for election of specified societies are complete code in itself providing for the entire process of election beginning from the stage of preparation of the provisional voters list, decision on the objection by the Collector, finalisation of electoral rolls, holding of election and declaration of result of the election. In view of the scheme of the Act and Rules, the preparation of voters' list must be held to be part of the election process for constituting managing committee of a specified society.

12. In view of our finding that preparation of the electoral roll is being an intermediate stage in the process of election of the managing committee of a specified society and the election process having been set in motion, it is well settled that the High Court should not stay the continuation of the election process even though there may be some alleged illegality or breach of rules while preparing the electoral roll. It is not disputed that the election in question has already been held and the result thereof has been stayed by an order of this Court, and once the result of the election is declared, it would be open to the appellant to challenge the election of returned candidate, if aggrieved, by means of an election petition before the election tribunal.

12. It follows from this decision that the adjudication of all questions must be as provided under Section 7

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