The court affirmed that a Deputy Commissioner, acting as District Election Officer, lawfully recommended appointments even amid allegations of corruption, viewing the recommendation as advisory without statutory issues.

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

1. Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for Respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 4. Sri G.V. Bharmagoudar, learned counsel, accepts notice for Respondent Nos. 3 and 5. Sri K. Anand Kumar, learned counsel, is directed to accept notice for Respondent No. 6.

2. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

a. Issue writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 8.09.2025 bearing no. DCCB/ Chunavane/Sa.Ch./Vargavane/CR302/2025-26 passed by the 4^th respondent dated 8.09.2025 marked as Annexure-F.

b. Issue wit in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order bearing no. NIL dated 8.09.2025 passed by the 6^th respondent marked as Annexure-G.

c. Grant such other reliefs as deemed fit under the facts and the circumstances of the case.

3. The grievance of the petitioners arises out of the instructions issued by the Deputy Commissioner and District Election Officer for Federal Co-operative Societies in Belagavi District, directing the 6th respondent to appoint Election Officers/Inspectors in respect of the M.K. Hubballi and Kittur branches of the concerned Society.

4. Sri.Gurudas Kannur, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that there being serious allegations of corruption and political interference against the previously appointed inspectors, namely Sri Basanagouda Linganagouda Patil and Sri Vikram Madivalappa Khodanpur. The Chief Executive officer of the Society having acted on the same had directed transfer of the said individuals, however, the 4th respondent, namely the Deputy Commissioner and District Election Officer, directed the appointment of two other individuals in their place.

5. It is the contention of the petitioners that the Deputy Commissioner/District Election Officer lacks statutory power either to appoint or recommend appointment of such inspectors, and that the said action was taken at the instance of a local Member of Legislative Assembly, thereby undermining the autonomy of the Co-operative Society.

6. On behalf of the State and respondent authorities, the learned Additional Advocate General submits that the 4th respondent is not only the Deputy Commissioner but also the District Election Officer under Section 39 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short the Act). In terms of Rule 39AA of the said Act and Rule 13BB of the Rules framed thereunder, the Co-operative Election Authority is empowered to appoint Election Officers at the district, regional or state level. It is stated that the 4th respondent has been appointed as the District Election Officer for all Federal Co-operative Societies in Belagavi District. Acting in that capacity and taking into consideration the serious allegations that had been made, the District Election Officer only made a recommendation to appoint two independent inspectors, which recommendation was subsequently accepted and acted upon by the 6th respondent. It is therefore contended that there is neither any irregularity nor illegality in the said process, and that the impugned directions do not suffer from want of jurisdiction.

7. Upon consideration of the submissions and material on record, it is clear that the 4th respondent acted not in his capacity as Deputy Commissioner, but as the District Election Officer duly appointed under statutory provisions.

8. There is no dispute regarding the allegations made against the inspectors. Annexure-D reveals that Sri Veerappa Veerabasappa Doolappanavar, who was the Bank Inspector of Belagavi, has now been posted as the Bank Inspector of M.K. Hubballi. Sri Basanagouda Linganagouda Patil, who was the