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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38214

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.NAGAPRASANNA
MAHABALESHWAR S/O ANANT HEGDE – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 107743/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 107743 OF 2025 (CS-RES)

BETWEEN:

MAHABALESHWAR S/O. ANANT HEGDE AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YAJNIKA BUILDING, GOKUL COLONY, NEAR CAMPCO OFFICE, VIDYAGIRI, SIRSI, UTTARA KANNADA-581402 DELEGATE OF MENASI SEEMEYA GROUP GRAMAGALA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMIT, MENASI, AT POST VANALLI, TQ. SIRSI UTTARA KANNADA-581336.

… PETITIONER (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B.HIREMATH AND MISS GAYATHRI S.R., ADVOCATES)

Digitally signed by AND:

RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: Hig h

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, R/BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY Dharwad DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-590001.

2. THE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY, R/BY ITS COMMISSIONER, TTMC BLOCK, SHANTI NAGAR, BANGALORE-590027.

3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BELAGAVI REGION BELAGAVI AND ELECTION OFFICER TO ALL SECONDARY SOCIETIES AND BELAGAVI REGION JAKKERI HONDA, BELAGAVI-590001.

4. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT KARWAR-581342

5. THE RETURNING OFFICER, DCC LTD, SIRSI UTTARA KANNADA-581412

6. KANAGOD MULTIPURPOSE PRIMARY VILLAGE AGRICULTURE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, YADALLI VILLAGE, YADALLI, TQ. SIRSI DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581340. 7. THE KANARA DCC BANK LTD SIRSI UTTARA KANNADA R/BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SIRSI-581402.

… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.RAMESH CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1 TO R5;

SRI. GURUDAS KHANNUR, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. SOURABH SONDUR ADVOCATE FOR R6;

SRI. VISHWANATH HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R7)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED LIST AS ANNEXURE- A SO FAR AS IS IT RELATES TO SERIAL NO.11, DELEGATE FORM NO.022 IN RESPECT OF RESPONDENT NO.6 AND ITS DELEGATE BE QUASHED.

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

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

“a. Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned list as Annexure- A so far as is it relates to serial no.11, delegate Form no.022 in respect of Respondent no.6 and its delegate be quashed.

b. Issue any other writ or order as this Hon’ble Court may deems fit in circumstances of the case including the cost of these proceedings, in the ends of justice.”

2. Heard the learned counsel Shri Mallikarjunswamy B.Hiremath along with Miss Gayathri S.R. appearing for the petitioner; learned AGA, Shri Ramesh Chigari appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5; learned Senior counsel Shri Gurudas Khannur along with Shri Sourabh Sondur appearing for respondent No.6; and the learned counsel Shri Vishwanath Hegde appearing for respondent No.7.

3. The facts in brief germane are as follows:

The issue revolves around the interpretation of the Co-

operative Societies Act qua Section 21 insofar as it permits voting of a delegatee in an election. The sixth respondent - Society nominates a particular delegatee on 27.07.2024 for the first time for the purpose of voting in the ensuing elections therein. Later on 30.08.2025, it transpires that the sixth respondent - Society again nominates a delegatee for the purpose of participation in the general meeting of the Society or if need arises also to vote in the ensuing elections thereon. For the third time, on 25.10.2025, it transpires that the sixth respondent again nominates the delegatee for voting in the ensuing elections and the delegatee has now cast his vote. The petition calls in question the action of the Society in nominating the delegatee, thrice over for the conduct of elections or otherwise.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Shri Mallikarjunswamy B.Hiremath, taking this Court through the mandate of the statute would seek to contend that the delegatee, which is now sent by the sixth respondent, whether he votes in the gene

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