IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 10498 OF 2024 (CS-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. KAREEM SAB D.

S/O SHAIKH MOINUDDIN AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/A NEAR CHURCH, BEGUMPURA PETE, MUDAGAL LINGASUGUR TALUK RAICHUR DISTRICT – 584 125.

…PETITIONER (BY SMT./ MISS. KANAKA MAHALAKSHMI D., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHETHAN A.C., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digit ally signed by

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA SUNITHA K S Location: REPRESENTED BY ITS HIGH COURT PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, OF CO OPERATION DEPARTMENT, KARNATAKA VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560 001.

2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES URBAN BANKS DIVISION, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES NO.1 ALI ASKAR ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001.

3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KALYANA KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD CENTRAL BUS STAND RAICHUR – 584 101.

4. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES RAICHUR DISTRICT OPP TALUK PANCHAYAT STATION ROAD RAICHUR – 584 101.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2 AND R4;

SRI. M. RAVINDRANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 06/02/2024 BEARING NO. UBC- 3/DIS-29C/04/2023-24 PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT ON AN APPLICATION FILED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT DISQUALIFYING THE PETITIONER FROM THE DIRECTORS POSITION FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE TERM (ANNEXURE-A);

AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 06.02.2024 passed by respondent No.2 on an application filed by respondent No.3 disqualifying the petitioner from the Directors position for the remaining period of term vide Annexure-A.

2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows:

3. The petitioner was the president of Kalyana Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Employees Credit Co-operative Society, Raichur, and he refused to sign the proceedings of the General Body Meeting prepared by respondent No.3, because respondent No.3 had added his own writings contrary to the resolutions. On a complaint by respondent No.3, show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by respondent No. 4 and the petitioner replied to the show cause notice. Thereafter, respondent No.4 forwarded the file to respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 did not consider the contentions raised by the petitioner in the reply notice and passed the impugned order vide Annexure-A. Hence, this writ petition.

4. Heard Ms.Kanaka Mahalakshmi D., learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.3.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is passed on 06.02.2024. Though the next date of hearing was fixed on 07.02.2024, i.e., without preponing the date of hearing the respondent has passed the order on 06.02.2024, and the respondent before passing an order has not heard the petitioner. The impugned order passed by respondent No.2 is behind the back of the petitioner and is in violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, on these grounds, she prays to allow the writ petition.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents fairly conceded that the matter was adjourned to 07.02.2024, but respondent No.2 has passed an order on 06.02.2024 and he submits that the impugned order, be quashed and the matter be remitted to respondent No.2 with a direction to reconsider, and pass the appropriate order after providing an opportunity of hearings to both the parties.

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

8. It is an undisputed fact that respondent No.3 filed a complaint against the petitioner before respondents.

Respondent No.4 issued a