SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 25612

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
BHEEMANAKONE PRATHAMIKA SAHAKARI KRISHI AND GRAMINA ABIRUDDI BANK NIYAMITHA – Appellant
Versus
HON'BLE MINISTER OF CO-OPERATION – Respondent
WP 4830 / 2022



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.4830 OF 2022 (CS-RES)

BETWEEN:

BHEEMANAKONE PRATHAMIKA SAHAKARI KRISHI AND GRAMINA ABIRUDDI BANK NIYAMITHA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER SRI BHARATH KUMAR M.H.

BHEEMANKONE, SAGAR TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 417. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI HARISH KUMAR M.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. HON’BLE MINISTER OF CO-OPERATION GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, Digitally signed BENGALURU – 560 001.

by YAMUNA K L Location: HIGH 2. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA COURT OF REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.

3. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES BANGALORE REGION, BANGALORE ‘SAHAKARA SOUDHA’, 8TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE – 560 003.

4. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA SAVALANGA ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA – 577 201.

5. SRI B.V. SRINIVAS SENIOR INSPECTOR AND ENQUIRY OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES OFFICE OF DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SAVALANGA ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA – 577 201.

(AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED

21/03/2022 THE R-5 HAS BEEN DELETED)

6. SRI M.K. THIMMAPPA S/O. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS, R/O. MAVINASARA, SAGAR TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT- 577 401. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SIDHARTH BABURAO, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4;

V/O. DATED 21/03/2022 R-5 IS DELETED;

SRI S.R. HEGDE HUDLAMANE, ADVOCATE FOR R-6)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1-HON’BLE MINISTER FOR CO-OPERATION, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA IN CO:05:CAP:2016 DATED 25.01.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-G REVERSING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN APPEAL NO.JRB/APPEAL/08/2014-15 DATED 05.02.2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND THE RESPONDENT NO.4 IN DRS/SECTION.64/CR23/2014-15/569 DATED 16.06.2014 VIDE ANNEXURE-C.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR DICTATION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

Knocking the doors of this Court the Bheemanakone Prathamika Sahakari Krishi and Gramina Abivruddi Bank Niyamitha (hereinafter referred to as ‘Bank’ for short) is before this Court in this writ petition assailing the order passed by respondent No.1-Minister of Co-Operation, Government of Karnataka dated 25.01.2022 reversing the order passed by respondent No.3-Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (JRCS) dated 05.02.2016 and the order passed by respondent No.4-Deputy Registrar of the Co-operative Societies (DRCS) dated 16.06.2014.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.1 is not the Competent Authority under Section 108 of the Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act, 1959 (‘the KCS Act’ for short) to hear the revision. Respondent No.1 has erroneously exercised its power and set aside the orders passed by respondent Nos.3 and 4, when the fact remains that the Principal Secretary of the Department of Co-Operation is the Competent Authority. That the impugned order is passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to put forth his case, therefore, the impugned order is unsustainable. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents reiterating the grounds urged in the statement of objections submits that remanding the matter on a technical ground that the petitioner is not heard before respondent No.1 is nothing but a futile exercise to harass and humiliate the respondents.

5. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the question that falls for consideration is:

“Whether in the given situation there exists a legal issue involving the violation of principles of natural justice?”

6. The brief facts which need to be narrated here for adjudication of this petition are;

The petition

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top