IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO.100264 OF 2025 (CS-RES)

BETWEEN:

MUTTAPPA S/O. VENKAPPA BAJANNAVAR, AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE, R/O. DADANATTI, TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT, PIN-587122.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVARAJ P.MUDHOL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, MOHANKUMAR M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-1.

B SHELAR

2. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, BAGALKOT, SHELAR DIST. BAGALKOT, PIN-587101.

Date: 2026.03.17 14:13:52 +0530

3. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, JAMKHANDI, AT. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BELAGAVI, PIN-587301.

4. THE PRATHAMIK KRISHI PATTIN SANGH NIYAMIT, DADANATTI-HOSAKOTE, TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, PIN-587313.

5. SMT. J.G. SAVAJI, INQUIRY OFFICER, THE PRATHAMIK KRISHI PATTIN SAHAKARA SANGH NIYAMIT, DADANATTI-HOSAKOTE, AT. DADANATTI, TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT, PIN-587313.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R.PATIL, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3;

SRI. SRINIVAS B.NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R4;

SRI. J.G. SAVADI, ADVOCATE FOR R5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO 1. TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07/01/2025 IN APPEAL NO.DRBGK/ABN/PACS DA/SECTION 106/NO.09/2024-2025 PASSED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-D. 2. TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 2^ND RESPONDENT TO ALLOW THE INTERIM APPLICATION I.E., I.A. I FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED NIL VIDE ANNEXURE-C. 3. TO ISSUE ANY OTHER ORDER, DIRECTIONS AS DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)

Enquiry Officer submitted his report, and thereafter an order dated 06.11.2024 came to be passed by respondent No.3 under Section 68 of the Act.

4. Being aggrieved by the order dated 06.11.2024 passed under Section 68 of the Act, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 106(3) of the Act along with an interim application seeking stay of the execution and operation of the order dated 06.11.2024 passed under Section 68 of the Act. 5. Respondent No.2, by the impugned order dated

07.01.2025 vide Annexure-D, rejected the said application.

6. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3, and the learned counsel Sri.Srinivas B.

Naik appearing for respondent No.4.

8. Notice to respondent No.5 is served, but there has been no representation made in this regard.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.2, while passing the impugned order, has not applied his mind and has failed to consider the order passed by the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No.4623/2017 and connected matters where it was observed that in a statutory appeal grant of stay is rule and denial of stay is exception. He further submits that if the interim order as prayed for is not granted, the very purpose of filing the appeal would become redundant. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition.

10. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents has supported the impugned order. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition.

11. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

12. It is an undisputed fact that proceedings were initiated under Section 64 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 against the petitioner. Pursuant to the said proceedings, a report was submitted and thereafter an order came to be passed under Section 68 of the Act.

13. Being aggrieved by the order passed under Section

68 of the Act, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 106(3) of th