Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22390

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Ashok S. Kinagi, J
Ramakrishna – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.102328 OF 2026|WRIT PETITION NO.106790 OF 2025|WRIT PETITION NO.107485 OF 2025|WRIT PETITION NO.107678 OF 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vivek N. Subbareddy, Mahadev M.R., N.V. Yaji
For the Respondents: Kirtilata R. Patil, Jayakumar S. Patil, Vishwanath Hegde

An administrator of a co-operative society possesses limited powers for day-to-day management and election conduct only; they cannot unilaterally withdraw significant litigation. Additionally, inordinate delay of 27 years in challenging administrative orders without sufficient cause defeats equity and warrants dismissal at the threshold.

Headnote:(A) Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 - Section 28A - Management - Administrator - Appointment of administrator confers limited administrative functions; he cannot take major policy decisions affecting legal rights of society, such as withdrawing ongoing litigation, without authorization from competent authority or registrar. (Paras 14, 15, 17)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Laches and Delay - Inordinate delay of 27 years in challenging an administrative order without sufficient cause or explanation is fatal and warrants dismissal of proceedings as delay defeats equity. (Paras 12, 13, 18)

(C) Writ Jurisdiction - Election Process - Intervention - Courts ought not to interfere in the election process once the calendar of events is notified and the process has commenced, as an alternative statutory remedy is generally available. (Paras 9, 10, 11)

Facts of the case:
The disputes pertained to the election process of a cooperative society, an amendment to bye-laws regarding voting rights, and the appointment of an administrator following the expiry of the governing body's term. Various petitions were filed challenging the administrator's resolution to withdraw pending litigation, the validity of bye-law amendments revised after 27 years, and the conduct of the election process.

Findings of Court:
The court found that an administrator's powers are confined to day-to-day management and election facilitation and do not extend to unilaterally withdrawing legal proceedings. Furthermore, the court held that a revision application filed after 27 years without satisfactory justification for delay must be rejected. Lastly, the court declined to interfere with the election process once initiated, directing the results to be announced.

Issues: 1. Whether an administrator has the authority to unilaterally withdraw legal proceedings on behalf of a society. 2. Whether a delay of 27 years in challenging an order can be condoned without sufficient cause. 3. Whether the court should interfere with an ongoing election process.

Ratio Decidendi: An administrator appointed under statute holds limited powers restricted to acting in the society's day-to-day interest and facilitating elections; they lack authority for major policy changes or litigation withdrawal without registrar oversight. Moreover, inordinate delay without legitimate cause cannot be condoned as equity follows the law and does not reward indolence.

Result: Petitions allowed in part, dismissed in part, and disposed of accordingly.

Table of Content
1. inordinate 27-year delay bars revision petition on merits. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
2. administrator functions are limited to day-to-day management. (Para 20)

THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

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

In WP No.102328 of 2026

1. This writ petition is filed challenging the resolution dated 09.03.2026 passed by Respondent No. 6 acting as Administrator of Respondent No. 7 Co-operative Society, directing the society to withdraw W.P. No. 107485/ 2025 pending before this Hon’ble Court.

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

3. The Petitioners are members of the 7th respondent Society. The elections to the Managing Committee of the Society were scheduled for the year 2025, and the polling was conducted on 28.09.2025. It is contended that, before the declaration of results, W.P. No.106790/2025 came to be filed before this Hon'ble Court, wherein this Hon'ble Court by an interim order dated 24.09.2025, restrained the authorities from announcing the election results. Consequently, though the election was conducted, the Returning Officer could not declare the results.

4. Meanwhile, an appeal had been preferred before the Secretary of the Co-operative Department / Competent Authority, challenging the amendment of the bye-laws of the 7th Respondent Society. The said Revision was allowed by the competent authority. Aggrieved by the same, the 7th Respondent Society filed W.P. No.107485/2025 before this Hon'ble Court. This Hon'ble Court granted an interim stay of the order passed by the Co-operative Department, and the said writ petition was later clubbed with W.P. No. 106790 of 2025 and is pending consideration.

5. It is contended that, despite the fact that the election process had already been completed and the declaration of results was withheld only due to the interim order of this Hon'ble Court, the 4th Respondent / Deputy Registrar, by order dated 14.10.2025, appointed the Assistant Registrar, Sirsi Administrator of the Society, stating that the term of the Governing Body had expired on 13.10.2025. Thereafter, he tendered his resignation on 20/02/2026. Thereafter Modification order dated 23/02/2026 was passed. The 6th respondent assumed charge as the Administrator of the 7th respondent society on 25/02/2026.

6. It is contended that the 6th Respondent has passed a resolution dated 09.03.2026, directing that W.P. No.107485/2025, which has been filed by the Society and is presently pending before this Hon'ble Court, should be withdrawn through the counsel on record. Therefore, the Petitioners have approached this Hon'ble Court seeking to quash the resolution dated 09.03.2026 and to restrain the Respondents from withdrawing W.P. No.107485/2025. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

7. Heard the arguments of the learned senior counsel Sri. Vivek N. Subbareddy for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the respondents and the learned HCGP.

8. Learned senior counsel Sri. Vivek N. Subbareddy for the petitioner submits that the impugned resolution dated 09.03.2026 passed by the Administrator- 6th Respondent, is wholly without jurisdiction. He submits that the Administrator is entrusted only with limited administrative functions and cannot take policy decisions affecting the legal rights of the society. The appointment of the administrator is wholly temporary in nature and the administrator is expected to ensure day to day administration of the society until the management committee is duly elected. It is further submitted that the impugned resolution came to be passed without any consultation with the members of the society. The impugned action of 6th respondent in directing to withdraw the writ petition by passing the resolution amounts to frustration of adjudication pending consideration. Further, he submits that the s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22390

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAAshok S. Kinagi, JRamakrishna – AppellantVersusState of Karnataka – RespondentWRIT PETITION NO.102328 OF 2026|WRIT PETITION NO.106790 OF 2025|WRIT PETITION NO.107485 OF 2025|WRIT PETITION NO.107678 OF 2025

Cases Referred (2)

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Ashok S. Kinagi, J
Ramakrishna – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.102328 OF 2026|WRIT PETITION NO.106790 OF 2025|WRIT PETITION NO.107485 OF 2025|WRIT PETITION NO.107678 OF 2025