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) 3010

2025 KHC-D 14425
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
Annasab S/o Krishna Patil – Appellant
Versus
The State of Karnataka – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 107799 of 2025
Decided On : 28-10-2025
Advocates Appeared : 
For the Appellants : Shivaraj P. Mudhol, Anand Bagewadi
For the Respondents : Ramesh Chigari, G.V. Bharamagouda

The court emphasized the necessity of due process in the electoral process, ruling that deficiencies in preparing the electoral roll must be remedied to ensure fairness in elections.

Headnote:(A) Co-operative Societies Act - Section 70(2) - Writ petition regarding electoral roll and voting rights - The Court found deficiencies in the preparation of the electoral roll, specifically a lack of individual notices to excluded members, violating Rule 13-D (2-A) of the Co-operative Societies Rules - The issues addressed include whether excluded members were afforded due process in the election process and whether the results of the election should include the votes cast by the petitioners. (Paras 10, 11, 12)

(B) Election Process - Importance of Due Process - The court reiterated that the election process requires fairness and transparency, and deficiencies in the electoral roll preparation must be addressed, ensuring that affected individuals have an opportunity to contest exclusions. (Para 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners claimed exclusion from the electoral roll without proper notice and sought to include their votes in the election results. The Court observed that the election had already been held, but deficiencies in the final electoral roll preparation were admitted by the respondents.

Findings of Court:
The Court directed the Returning Officer to announce the results including the votes cast by the petitioners while allowing the parties to pursue further remedies as per the Co-operative Societies Act.

Issues: The main issues were the procedural deficiencies in the electoral roll preparation and the right of excluded members to have their votes counted.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the failure to notify excluded members constituted a violation of the rules governing the election process, necessitating the inclusion of their votes in the election results.

Result: Writ petitions disposed of directing the announcement of election results including the votes cast by the petitioners.

Table of Content
1. the issue involves election results and notice requirements. (Para 1)
2. court orders result announcement including petitioners' votes. (Para 2 , 3)

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 June2022. 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 mean

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