IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 106745 OF 2025 (CS-RES)

BETWEEN:

HULEKAL SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITA, HULEKAL-581336, TAL-SIRSI U. K. DISTRICT REP. BY ITS OCC: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AGE: 47 YEARS.

… PETITIONER (BY SRI. H M DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE KARNATAKA DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, NEW MARKET YARD, SIRSI UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

2. SANDESH SEETARAM BHAT A/A 35 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST R/O. BAROOR, TAL-SIRSI UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT.

Digitally signed by RAKESH S … RESPONDENTS HARIHAR Location: High (BY SRI.A.P. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2-SERVED)

Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE BEARING NO. 6273/2025- 26 IMPUGNED ORDER ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED. 08-08- 2025 (ANNEXURE-A) and to PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HON BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE AWARD OF COSTS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORAL ORDER

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

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

“I) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari by Quashing the Bearing No.6273/2025-26 impugned order issued by Respondent No.1 dated. 08-08-2025 (Annexure-A).

II) Pass such other orders as this Hon’ble court deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the case including the award of costs in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and respondent No.1 in unison would submit the issue in the lis stands covered by judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.104276 of 2023, disposed off on 4^TH October 2023. The Coordinate Bench, held as follows:

“The captioned writ petition is filed by the President and vice President of 2^nd respondent/society assailing the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 vide Annexure-B in nominating 3^rd respondent to the 2^nd respondent/society.

2. The petitioners have questioned the impugned order vide Annexure-B passed by 1^st respondent in appointing 3^rd respondent as a nominee to 2^nd respondent/Society. The petitioner’s grievance is that the 3^rd respondent could not have been appointed as a nominee to the Board of 2^nd respondent/Society. The petitioners claim that in term of definition of nominee as per Section 2(f-3) of Karnataka Co- operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short ‘the Act’) it is only members of a Board or official of the Co- operative Society appointed by the Board can represent as a nominee in other Co-operative Societies. Petitioners claim that 3^rd respondent is just a member of 2^nd respondent/Society and he is not the member of the Board of 1^st respondent/Society nor he is an official of respondent No.1. On these set of grounds, the order passed by 1^st respondent in appointing 3^rd respondent as a nominee is challenged.

3. The 1^st respondent to counter the grounds urged in the writ petition have filed the statement of objection. The 3^rd respondent is appointed as a nominee of 1^st respondent to 2^nd respondent/Society has not chosen to contest the proceedings.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP and learned counsel appearing for 1^st respondent/Society.

5. Perused the material on record.

6. On perusal of Annexures-C and D it is clearly evident that 3^rd respondent is not the member of Board of 1^st respondent/Society. On perusal of Annexure-D it is forthcoming that he is just a member of 2^nd respondent/Society.

7. Before I proceed further it would be useful for this Court to cull out the definition of nominee as defined under Section 2(f-3) of the Act and the same reads as under;

“[(f-3) 'nominee' means a member of a board or official of th