THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING/SET ASIDE THE COMMUNICATION DATED. 07.03.2026 AT 7-12PM VIDE EMAIL FROM RESPONDENT NO.4 TO THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 26.03.2026, THIS DAY ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED THEREIN, AS UNDER:

CAV ORDER

1. The captioned writ petition is instituted calling in question the impugned communication dated 07.03.2026, issued through e-mail by respondent No.4 to the petitioner, as produced at Annexure-A, whereby the petitioner’s continuance as an elected Council Member representing the Karnataka State Centre of The Institution of Engineers (India) has been interdicted. Consequentially, a writ in the nature of mandamus is sought against respondent No.1 to permit the petitioner to discharge his duties in pursuance of his election, as evidenced at Annexure-C. During the pendency of proceedings, learned Senior counsel appearing for respondent No.1 placed on record an order dated 05.03.2026 passed by the Appellate Authority, and in that view of the matter, the petitioner has filed an application seeking amendment to assail the said appellate order, now produced at Annexure-A1.

2. The factual matrix, as pleaded, would indicate that respondent No.1 is a premier non-governmental professional body of engineers established in the year 1920, having its headquarters at Kolkata, with more than 110 centres across the country, including State Centres in various State capitals, engaged in the promotion of engineering and technological advancement through academic and professional activities for over a century. The petitioner claims that he was elected and served as the Honorary Secretary of the Karnataka State Centre for the session 2023–2025. It is his specific case that pursuant to a communication dated 21.05.2025 issued by the Secretary and Director General of respondent No.1, calling for conduct of elections for one Corporate Member to the Council from the Karnataka State Centre, elections from Divisions to the State Committee, and elections to the offices of Chairman and Honorary Secretary, a meeting of the State Committee was convened on 31.05.2025. In the said meeting, under Agenda No.4, it was resolved that a Board of Scrutineers be constituted and that the names of such members be intimated to the Headquarters on or before 30.06.2025.

3. The petitioner further asserts that the State Committee, in its meeting held on 31.05.2025, unanimously approved the constitution of the Board of Scrutineers by re-appointing the very same team which had successfully conducted the elections for the previous term (2023–2025). It is averred that upon securing concurrence from all the proposed members of the Board of Scrutineers, the petitioner, in his capacity as the then Honorary Secretary, formally communicated the names of five members to the Headquarters of respondent No.1 on 26.06.2025. Pursuant thereto, the Board of Scrutineers, in co-ordination with the Headquarters, issued the calendar of events governing the electoral process.

4. The petitioner would contend that the Headquarters, having accepted the constitution of the Board, proceeded to facilitate the conduct of elections by enabling requisite protocols, including generation and issuance of secured credentials and passwords to the Board of Scrutineers. On these foundational facts, the petitioner asserts that the Board of Scrutineers was duly constituted in strict compliance with the governing regulations of the Institution and was fully competent to conduct the elections in question.

5. It is the specific case of the petitioner that in the election so conducted, he was duly declared elected to the Council representing the Karnataka State Centre, having secured 2,287 votes, whereas the nearest rival candidate, namely one C.J. Jagadeesh, secured only 744 votes. The petitioner would further assert that pursuant to such declaration of results, he formal