DATED

13/07/2023

IN

APPEAL

NO.

DRM/DISPUTE /C7/APPEAL/20/2022-23 PASSED BY THE R2

VIDE ANNEXURE-L AND ETC.,

THIS

PETITION,

COMING

ON

FOR

PRELIMINARY

HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

- 3 -

ORDER

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed

to take notice for respondent No. 1 to 3 and 5.

Sri. K.S. Patil, learned counsel seeks to entered

appearance for respondent No.4.

2. The petitioner, who is the President of respondent

No.4-Halaganahalli Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative

Society Ltd., is before this Court calling in question the meeting

notice dated 13.07.2023 at Annexure-L while also challenging

the order dated 04.01.2023 at Annexure-G passed by

respondent No.3-Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Society,

Hunasuru Sub-Division.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

earlier some of the Directors of the Board gave requisitions to

the Chief Executive Officer of the Society seeking initiation of

no confidence motion against the petitioner. The said

representation was given on 10.11.2023. It is submitted that

in terms of the requirement the Chief Executive Officer wrote to

the Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies seeking

permission to consider no confidence against the petitioner.

- 4 -

However, it appears that some of the other elected Directors of

the Society gave representation dated 18.11.2022 to Assistant

Registrar of Co-Operative Societies and Chief Executive Officer

of the Society stating that six Directors of the Board are in

favour of the petitioner and therefore, the motion of no-

confidence should not be proceeded. Admittedly, no meeting to

consider motion of no-confidence was held.

4. However, subsequently some of the elected

Directors gave one more representation on 22.12.2022 to the

Chief Executive officer seeking initiation of no-confidence

motion against petitioner. In terms of the requisition given by

the Directors, the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies

has passed an order dated 04.01.2023 appointing the Co-

operative Development Officer as the authority to hold the

meeting of no-confidence motion against the petitioner. The

petitioner challenged the same by filing an appeal under

Section 106 of the Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act before

respondent No.2-Deputy Registrar of Co-Operative Societies,

Mysuru Region. Learned counsel submits that initially there was

an order of stay by the Deputy Registrar of Co-Operative

Societies. However, the appeal was dismissed by order dated

- 5 -

13.07.2023. Thereafter, impugned meeting notice dated

25.07.2023 at Annexure-M has been issued by the officer

empowered to consider the no-confidence motion.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in

terms of Sub-Section (1) of Section 29-H of the Karnataka Co-

Operative Societies Act, 1959, if earlier a no-confidence motion

was defeated, then a fresh motion shall not be introduced

within period of one year thereafter. Learned counsel would

therefore submit that since admittedly the motion of no-

confidence moved on 10.11.2022 failed, the initiation of fresh

motion of no-confidence within period of one year cannot be

sustained.

6. Learned counsel would also submit that the

Authorized Officer has not given 15 clear days notice as

provised under Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 14-AKK of the Karnataka

Co-Operative Societies Rules, 1960, therefore, on both counts

the impugned meeting notice has to be set aside.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent

No.4-Society submits that the petitioner cannot contend that

the earlier motion of no-confidence moved on 10.11.2023 was

defeated since, admittedly, no meeting was held to consider

- 6 -

the motion of no-confidence and there is nothing on record to

show that the motion of no-confidence was defeated.

8. In so far as the second limb of argument of

learned counsel for the petitioner regarding failure of issuance

of clear days notice is concerned, learned couns