2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 440204
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M G UMA, J
SRI SURENDRA H C – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 14463/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
WRIT PETITION NO. 14463 OF 2025 (CS-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI SURENDRA H.C.
S/O CHANDREGOWDA H.H.,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED
PRESIDENT, THE PLANTER
CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD
KARIGOWDA COLONY
HASSAN - 573 201
2. SRI NAGARAJU B M S/O LATE MALLE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED
DIRECTOR, THE PLANTER
CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,
KARIGOWDA COLONY
HASSAN - 573 201
Digitally signed …PETITIONERS
by PRASHANTH
N V (BY SRI. R.S. RAVI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
Location: High
SRI. AKARSH KUMAR GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
Court of
Karnataka
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF CO OPERATIVE
M S BUILDING, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560001.
2. THE PLANTER CO OPERATIVE
SOCIETY LTD., PP NO 23,
KARIGOWDA COLONY,
B.M. ROAD, HASSAN 573201
(REGISTERED IN THE OFFICE OF REGISTER OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES IN RC/1969/63-64)
3. SRI ANANTHA KUMAR H A S/O APPANNA H R AGED MAJOR HANUBALU POST SAKALESHPUR TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 134 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA FOR R1 SRI. KESHAV MURTHY K.R., ADVOCATE FOR R3 R2 - SD/-)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DTD. 18.03.2025 BEARING NO. CO 110 CNS 2025 (E)
ISSUED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNX-A. AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
ORAL ORDER
Petitioners being the President and Directors of respondent No.2 Society have approached this Court, seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the Notification dated 18.03.2025 issued by respondent No.1, produced as per Annexure A; and appointment of respondent No.3 as one of the Directors of respondent No.2 Society under Section 28A(4B) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, (for short, 'the KCS Act').
2. Heard Sri. R.S. Ravi, learned senior advocate for Sri.
Akarsh Kumar Gowda, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and Sri. Keshav Murthy K.R., learned counsel for respondent No.3. Perused the materials on record.
3. Learned senior advocate for the petitioners contend that as per Section 28A(4B) of KCS Act, the State Government may nominate one person as its representative only if the Society is an Assisted Society. As per the definition of the word 'Assisted Society' as found in Section 2(a-1-1) means "a Co- operative Society which has received the assistance in the form of share capital or loan or grant or guarantee for repayment of the loan or interest."
4. It is further contended that Annexure-D dated
17.03.2025 is the Letter written by respondent No.2 - Society to the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, making it clear that a sum of Rs.1,99,000/- referred to in his letter was released from the Government under Loan Waiver Scheme, which is yet to be adjusted to the account of the respective borrowers. But the Society has not availed any loan or not got any grant from the Government. Therefore, it is contended by the learned senior advocate for the petitioners that, the Society had never got a loan or grant from the Government. Hence, it cannot be considered as an Assisted Society as defined under the Act.
5. Learned senior advocate for the petitioners referring to Annexure-D Letter dated 15.12.2025 produced along with the memo dated 17.12.2025 contended that the Chief Executive Officer of respondent No.2 - Society issued the certificate that the said Society had never received any agricultural loan and it is being run through its own source and therefore contended that respondent No.2-Society is not an Assisted Society. Under such circumstances, Annexure-A is liable to be quashed.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 place reliance on the decision of this Court in L.N. Shivar