Disposed

Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies

Karnataka HC1 Jul 2022WP/12971/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners, a Co-operative Society and its President, challenged the rejection of a proposed amendment to the society's governing byelaws. The Court observed that the appeal against the impugned order under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act was pending and the Registrar's office was vacant. Consequently, the Court di

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents not to disturb the third petitioner's continuation as the President of the Society until the decision in the pending appeal proceedings.

Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Vs Registrar of… — Cooperative Societies | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 01^ST DAY OF JULY 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.12971/2022 (CS-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE PURAKARMIKARA AND GANGMEN NOUKARA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD., A-109, 2nd CROSS, VINAYAKA BADAVANE KEMPEGOWDANAGARA, BENGALURU 560019 REP BY ITS PRESIDENT

¶8

BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE POURAKARMIKARA AND GANGMEN, NOUKARA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD., A 109, 2nd CROSS, VINAYAKA BADAVANE, KEMPEGOWDANAGARA, BENGALURU 560019 REP BY ITS INCHARGE SECRETARY

¶9

NARASIMHA S/O CHIKKANARASAIAH PRESIDENT, BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE PURAKARMIKARA AND GANGMEN, NOUKARA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD., R/O 174/2, 1st MAIN ROAD,

¶10

¶11

SESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU 560020

¶12

... PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR A/W

¶14

SRI. DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND :

¶16

REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD, BENGLAURU 560001

¶17

THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BENGALURU REGION, BENGALURU 3rd FLOOR, SAHAKARA SOUDHA, MARGOSA ROAD, 8th CROSS, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU 560008

¶18

... RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. VENKAT SATYANARAYAN A, HCGP FOR R1 & R2)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-D IN NO.JRB/AMD/56/2021-22 PASSED BY R2 DTD 08.02.2022; DIRECT THE R2 TO REGISTER THE BYE LAW NO.6 OF THE PETITIONER NO.3 SOCIETY AS PER THE RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE SOCIETY ON 14.11.2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-C.

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The petitioners, a Co-operative Society [Society] and its certain office bearers, have impugned the order dated 08.02.2022 (Annexure-D) by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Bengaluru [the second respondent]. The second respondent by this impugned order has rejected an amendment to Byelaw 6 approved by the General Body. The Byelaw as it existed, and the

¶25

proposed amendment read as under:

¶26

§zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀiÁr M¦àzÀ wÃªÀiÁð£ÀUÀ¼À ±À§Ý gÀZÀ£É ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀéPÉÌ C£ÀºÀðvÉUÀ¼ÀÄ: ¸ÀAWÀzÀ PÁAiÀÄðPÉëÃvÀæzÀ°è SÁAiÀÄA ¤ªÁ¹AiÀiÁVgÀÄª 18 ªÀµÀðPÉÌ ªÉÄÃ®àlÄÖ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 1872gÀ ¨sÁgÀvÀ PgÁgÀÄ C¢ü¤AiÀÄªÀÄzÀ (PÉÃAzÀæ C¢ü¤AiÀÄªÀÄ 1872gÀ 2£ÉÃ ±Á¸À£À 11£ÉÃ ¥ÀæPÀgÀt CrAiÀÄ°è CºÀðªÁVgÀÄªÀªÀgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ CªÀgÀÄ §ÈºÀvï ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ªÀÄºÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Á°PÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÀUÀgÀ¸À¨sÉ (¹.JA.¹. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ n.JA.¹) AiÀiÁªÀÅzÁzÀgÀÆ PÀbÉÃjAiÀÄ SÁAiÀÄA £ËPÀgÀ£ÁVzÀÄÝ, CªÀ£À ªÉÃvÀ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄºÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Á°PÉAiÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÀUÀgÀ¸À¨sÉ (¹.JA.¹ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ n.JA.¹) ¨sÀj¸ÀÄwÛgÀ¨ÉÃPÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ JgÀqÀÄ ªÀµÀðUÀ½UÉ PÀrªÉÄ E®èzÀAvÉ ¸ÀvÀvÀªÁV ¸ÉÃªÉ ¸À°è¹gÀÄªÀ ªÀåQÛUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé ¥ÀqÉAiÀÄ®Ä CºÀðjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄ ¤ªÀÈwÛ ºÉÆA¢zÀ £ÀAvÀgÀªÀÇ CªÀgÀ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀéªÀÅ ªÀÄÄAzÀÄªÀgÉAiÀÄÄvÀÛzÉ.

¶27

The second respondent has assigned the following

¶28

reason for rejection of this amendment:

¶29

¶30

G¥À«¢ü wgÀ¸ÀÌj¹zÀÝPÉÌ	PÁgÀtUÀ¼ÀÄ
£ËPÀgÀgÀ ¸ÀAWÀªÁVzÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé CºÀðvÉUÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÀUÀgÀ¸À¨sÉ SÁAiÀÄA £ÀªÀPÀgÀgÁVzÀÄÝ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ ¤ªÀÈwÛ £ÀAvÀgÀªÀÇ ªÀÄÄAzÀÄªÀgÉAiÀÄÄvÀÛzÉA¢gÀÄªÀÅzÀjAzÀ M ªÀåwÛjPÀÛªÁVgÀÄªÀÅzÀjAzÀ wgÀ¸ÀÌj¹zÉ.	¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ªÉÃvÀ£À Cª AzÀPÉÆÌAzÀÄ	ªÀÄºÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Á°PÉ ¨sÀj¸ÀÄwÛgÀ¨ÉÃPÉA¢zÀÄÝ, ÀgÀ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀéªÀÅ vÁ¼ÉAiÀiÁUÀzÉÃ

¶31

Sri. Jayakumar S. Patil, the learned Senior

¶32

counsel for the petitioners, submits that the impugned order is called in question, as permitted under the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act (for short, ' the Co-operative Societies Act' ), in an appeal before the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The appeal is filed on 21.05.2022 and the appeal is yet to be numbered and listed for necessary orders. The petitioners’ interim application under Section 106(2) of the Co-operative Societies Act is also not listed. The petitioners are informed that the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Bengaluru is vacant as of now and that could be one of the reasons why the appeal/ interim application is not listed.

¶33

¶34

Sri. Jayakumar S. Patil also submits that the amendment proposed, which permits eligibility even for a retired BBMP employee, could not have been rejected and in any event the rejection of the amendment will have to be considered in the light of the decision of this Court in W.P.No13082/1977 decided on 28.11.1979 . The petitioners are constrained to approach this Court because the third petitioner, who is officiating as the President on his due election, will retire today from service on attaining superannuation.

¶35

These submissions are considered for final disposal after hearing Sri Venkat Satyanarayan A, the learned High Court Government Pleader, who does not dispute that the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Bengaluru is vacant as of today. This Court is of the considered opinion that the merits of the impugned order (Annexure-D) will have to be necessarily examined in the petitioners’ appeal under Section 106 of the Co-operative Societies Act and the question whether

¶36

¶37

the third petitioner could continue as the President even after attaining the age of superannuation will also have to be considered in such proceedings. In the meanwhile, if the third petitioner, who attains the age of superannuation today, is constrained to demit his office as the President of the Society, there could be a fait accompli .

¶38

This Court is therefore of the considered view that the petition must be disposed of directing the concerned not to disturb the third petitioner's continuation as the President of the Society until the decision in the pending application in the aforesaid appeal proceedings. It would be needless to observe that all contentions are

¶39

left open to be considered in the appeal.

¶40

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶41

SD/JUDGE

¶42

Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri M Venaktesh Vs M/S V2 Holdings Housing Development Private Ltd.

Mac Charles (India) Limited Vs Legacy Global Projects Private Ltd.

Mr N Sundar Vs M/S Bannari Constructions

Sri N Janardhan Vs Smt Swetha N

Suryodaya Infra Projects (I) Private Limited Vs Tenova India Private Limited

Sri. G.N. Rajashekar Vs Sri. G.R. Girish