Disposed

Sri Govindaraju v. the Deputy Registrar of Co. -

Karnataka HC12 Sept 2022WP/11926/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought to quash orders under Section 29-C of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act and direct the Deputy Registrar to dispose of an appeal. The High Court directed the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal on merits expeditiously within three months and ensured interim relief remains in force.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal on merits within three months and ordered continuation of the interim order dated 16.08.2022.

Sri Govindaraju Vs the Deputy Registrar of Co. - — Cooperative Societies | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.11926 OF 2022 [CS-RES]

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

1 . SRI GOVINDARAJU S/O LATE THIMMA BOVI AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

¶9

2 . SRI RAJEGOWDA S/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

¶10

3 . SRI BASAVARAJU T B S/O T BALAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

¶11

4 . SRI MAHADEVAIAH S/O LATE KARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS (BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED)

¶12

5 . SRI VENKATESHA S/O LATE SAMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

¶13

6 . SRI RAMEGOWDA S/O LATE NINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

¶14

(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED)

¶15

7 . SRI T M SHIVARAJU S/O LATE MANCHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

¶16

¶17

8 . SMT JAYALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

¶18

ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF THENKANAHALLI VILLAGE HONNAYAKANAHALLI POST MALURU HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

¶19

... PETITIONERS

¶20

(BY SRI. M.R.RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. H.N.BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶21

1 . THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES RAMANAGARA DISTRICT RAMANAGARA - 562 159

¶22

2 . THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES RAMANAGARA SUB-DIVISION RAMANAGARA - 562 159

¶23

3 . THENKANAAHALLI MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., SOCIETY AS REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 THENKANAHALLI, MALURU HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SRI G A SREENIVASA S/O LATE ANKEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶24

4 . SRI P DHARANIKUMAR SUPERINTENDENT AND SPECIAL OFFICER THENKANAHALLI MILK PRODUCERS

¶25

¶26

CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., THENKANAHALLI, MALURU HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

¶27

5 . SRI SIDDAPPAJI S/O LATE DOLLEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/O THENKANAHALLI VILLAGE MALURU HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

¶28

6 . SRI MAHADEVAIAH T M S/O LATE MODEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/O THENKANAHALLI VILLAGE, MALURU HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

¶29

...RESPONDENTS

¶30

(BY SMT. H.C.KAVITHA, HCGP FOR R1 & R2; SRI. N.R.KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R6; NOTICE TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 12.09.2022)

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2022 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, RAMANAGARA, IN CASE NO.SANIRA-46/29C/CR-07/2021-22 AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2022 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, RAMANAGARA, IN CASE NO.SANIRA-46/A.MAM.RA/CR/2021-22 AS PER ANNEXURE-F1; b) DECLARE THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY IN A DISPUTE UNDER SECTION 70 OF THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959, WHICH IS AN AWARD UNDER THE LAW, THAT AWARD HAS TO BE EXECUTED ONLY IN TERMS OF CHAPTER IX OF THE ACT, BUT NOT BY ANY OTHER METHOD INCLUDING INVOKING SECTION 29-C OF THE

¶32

¶33

ACT; AS SUCH, THE ORDER IMPUGNED OF RESPONDENT NO.2 TO BE DECLARED AS VOID AND WITHOUT AN AUTHORITY OF LAW; c) ALTERNATIVELY ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.1 DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA, TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONERS IN APPEAL NO.UNIRA/APPEALU/01/2022-23 AS PER ANNEXURE-G AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE INCLUDING THE APPLICATION FILED FOR INTERIM RELIEF TO BE CONSIDERED WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAY; d) PASS ANY APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION WITH COSTS, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶34

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the

¶37

following reliefs:

¶38

"a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ to quash the order dated 07.03.2022 passed by respondent No.2 Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Ramanagara, in case No.SANIRA-46/29C/CR07/2021-22 as per Annexure-F and the order dated 07.03.2022 passed by respondent No.2 Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Ramangara, in case No.SANIRA46/A.MAM.RA/CR/2021-22 as per AnnexureF1;

¶39

¶40

b) Declare that the order passed by the adjudicating authority in a dispute under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, which is an award under the law, that award has to be executed only in terms of Chapter IX of the Act, but not by any other method including invoking Section 29-C of the Act; as such, the order impugned of respondent No.2 to be declared as void and without an authority of law;

¶41

c) Alternatively, issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.1 Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Ramanagara District, Ramanagara, to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioners in Appeal No.UNIRA/APPEALU/01/2022-23 as per Annexure-G as expeditiously as possible including the application filed for interim relief to be considered without any further delay;

¶42

d) Pass any appropriate writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deem it fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and allow the Writ petition with costs, in the ends of justice and equity.."

¶43

¶44

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6. Perused the material on record.

¶45

Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in respect of their claims, on 10.08.2022, this Court passed the following interim order:

¶46

"Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents 1 and 2.

¶47

Copies to be served.

¶48

Issue emergent notice to respondents 3 to 6 returnable by 05.09.2022.

¶49

Heard.

¶50

The question with regard to maintainability of the petition is kept open.

¶51

Meanwhile, there shall be stay of impugned orders dated 07.03.2022 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexures F and F1, till the next date of hearing.

¶52

¶53

Liberty is reserved in favour of respondents to seek vacation/modification of this order . "

¶54

Subsequently, respondent No.1 - Appellate

¶55

Authority has passed an interim order on 16.08.2022 in favour of the petitioner, who is appellant before the said Authority.

¶56

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the rival contentions urged by the parties and keeping open to be decided by the Appellate Authority, I deem it just and proper to dispose of the writ petition directing respondent No.1 - Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal on merits in accordance with law after hearing both sides as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶57

It is further directed that till disposal of the appeal, the interim order dated 16.08.2022 passed by

¶58

¶59

the respondent No.1 - Appellate Authority shall continue to remain in force.

¶60

All rival contentions are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.

¶61

Sd/JUDGE

¶62

Sri Govindaraju v. the Deputy Registrar of Co. -

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Govindaraju v. the Deputy Registrar of Co. -

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gmr Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Assistant Director of Income Tax

Kum. Madhuri S Vs Karnataka State Law University

Smt.Venkamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Hemabasavaraju Vs Smt. Honnamma

Sree Deepthi Educational Trust (Regd) Vs the State of Karnataka

Ananthu K P Vs the State of Karnataka