Allowed

Sri D Venkatesh Murthy v. the District Registrar of Societies

Karnataka HC29 Oct 2022WP/15111/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka quashed an order passed by the District Registrar restraining the petitioner, an elected General Secretary, from functioning. The Court held that the Registrar exceeded jurisdiction by passing interim relief regarding election eligibility, which is exclusively for the Government/Registrar to determine in the final inquiry under Section 25.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 15-07-2022 quashed; the Petitioner allowed to function as General Secretary pending the outcome of the inquiry.

Sri D Venkatesh Murthy Vs the District Registrar of… — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 15111 OF 2022 (GM-KSR)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI D. VENKATESH MURTHY S/O A.V. DEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS GENERAL SECRETARY KARNATAKA PRADESH KURUBARA SANGHA KANAKADASA CIRCLE GANDHINAGARA BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SRINIVASA REDDY R.V., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed 1. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES by 4TH CIRCLE, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT PADMAVATHI SAHAKARA SOUDHA B K Location: HIGH 8^TH CROSS, 3^RD MAIN ROAD COURT OF MALLESHWARAM KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 003. 2. SRI T.B. BELAGAVI S/O BASAPPA DIRECTOR KARNATAKA PRADESH KURUBARA SANGHA

¶14

¶15

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶16

KANAKADASA CIRCLE GANDHINAGARA BANGALORE-560 009.

¶17

SRI KESHAVA MURTHY S/O BEERAIAH DIRECTOR KARNATAKA PRADESH KURUBARA SANGHA KANAKADASA CIRCLE GANDHINAGARA BENGALURU-560 009.

¶18

SRI PARMESH KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA DIRECTOR KARNATAKA PRADESH KURUBARA SANGHA KANAKADASA CIRCLE GANDHINAGARA BANGALORE-560 009.

¶19

THE KARNATAKA PRADESH KURUBARA SANGHA KANAKADASA CIRCLE GANDHINAGARA BENGALURU – 560 009 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1960.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI K. SUMAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI L.S. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-4; SRI NEELAKANTAPPA K. PUJAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; SRI SUBHASH CHANDRA BOSE, ADVOCATE FOR R-5)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.07.2022 PASSED BY THE R-1 IN DRB-4/SOR/98/2021-22, VIDE ANNEXURE-X IN SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO PETITIONER IS CONCERNED. DIRECT

¶23

¶24

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶25

THE R-1 TO CONCLUDE THE ENQUIRY AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 25 OF THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1960 AND ETC.

¶26

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

¶27

ORDER

¶28

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question order dated 15-07-2022 passed by the 1^st respondent/District Registrar of Societies, whereby the District Registrar places an embargo upon the petitioner not to function as General Secretary of the 5^th respondent / the Karnataka Pradesh Kurubara Sangha (‘the Sangha’ for short).

¶29

Heard Sri M.R.Rajagopal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1, Sri K.Suman, learned senior counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 4, Sri Neelakantappa K.Pujar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 and Sri Subhash Chandra Bose, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5.

¶30

¶31

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶32

Brief facts that lead the petitioner to this Court in subject petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:-

¶33

The petitioner presently functions as General Secretary of the Sangha. Elections to the office bearers of the Sangha were held on 26-06-2020. The Members of the then Committee and the petitioner were elected as office bearers. Certain dispute arose with regard to conduct of elections which led the petitioner and two directors to civil court in O.S.No.2729 of 2020, seeking a declaration that condition No.9 stipulated in the election notice and calendar of events pertaining to the election of office bearers of the Sangha would not become applicable to the petitioner and other two Directors and for other incidental reliefs. In the said suit, the petitioner and other two Directors filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, seeking a direction to the Returning Officer to conduct elections for the post of office bearers and permit the petitioner and two other Directors to contest for the post of office bearers of the Sangha. The civil Court grants an ad-interim order permitting the plaintiff/petitioner and other

¶34

¶35

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶36

two Directors to contest the election to the post of office bearers. Accordingly, elections were conducted; petitioner contested to the post of General Secretary and was elected as General Secretary of the 5^th respondent/Sangha in terms of declaration made on 26-06-2020. This forms the background for the conduct of elections and selection of the petitioner to the post of General Secretary.

¶37

Certain interlocutory applications were filed by the 2^nd respondent – 4^th defendant in the suit seeking a direction to restrain the petitioner from acting as General Secretary of the Sangha and permit him to act as interim General Secretary and an order passed therein reaches this Court in M.F.A.No.2801 of 2021. During the pendency of these proceedings respondent Nos.2 to 4 register a complaint or submit representation to the Hon’ble Minister for Cooperation as also the Registrar of Societies against the office bearers of the Sangha including the petitioner. The complaint registered before the Registrar of Societies becomes an enquiry under Section 25 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (‘the Act’ for short). Fifth respondent/Sangha issues notice to the petitioner with

¶38

¶39

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶40

regard to the pendency of the enquiry before the Registrar of Societies. It appears that the petitioner submitted a detailed reply to the said notice bringing certain facts on record with regard to the pendency of the dispute before the civil Court and those disputes reaching this Court in M.F.A.No.2801 of 2021 and the same is pending consideration at the hands of this Court. Notwithstanding all this being brought on record, the Registrar of Societies passes an order on 15-07-2022 directing that the petitioner should not discharge his duties as General Secretary of the 5^th respondent/Sangha until further orders. It is this order that drives the petitioner/General Secretary of the Sangha to this Court in the subject petition.

¶41

The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the order of the District Registrar is on the face of it without jurisdiction as Section 25 of the Act, contemplates the District Registrar to conduct an inquiry and send report to the Sangha as also to the Government. He had no jurisdiction to pass any order, which cannot even be passed at the final stage. The scope of inquiry is enlarged to an extent that the order on the face of it becomes illegal.

¶42

¶43

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶44

On the other hand, the learned senior counsel

¶45

representing respondent Nos.2 and 4 would contend that the petitioner was ineligible even to contest the election as General Secretary in terms of condition No.9, which depicted that once the office bearer would complete 6 years he would not be eligible to contest in the election. It was, therefore, the District Registrar has passed the impugned order but would admit that these very issues are pending consideration before the civil Court and this Court in the aforesaid M.F.A. No.2801 of 2021.

¶46

The learned High Court Government Pleader would seek to defend the act of the District Registrar contending that in exceptional circumstances, the District Registrar is empowered to pass certain orders, which would protect the interest of the Sangha and in the case at hand, owing to ineligibility on the part of the petitioner, the said order cannot be found to be bad in law.

¶47

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and perused the material on record.

¶48

¶49

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶50

The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The scope

¶51

of inquiry under Section 25 of the Act is by now a settled principle of law that the District Registrar cannot embark upon, which would in result become an election dispute. It is further not in dispute that these issues are now pending agitated before the civil Court. It is on the strength of the interim order passed by the civil Court, elections were held and the petitioner is elected. Therefore, every issue is at large before the civil Court. Notwithstanding pendency of those cases, complaints were registered before the District Registrar who takes up the issue under Section 25 of the Act and passes the following order:

¶52

“ ಕ�ಾ�ಟಕ ಪ��ೇಶ ಕುರುಬರ ಸಂಘ , �ೆಂಗಳ�ರು . ಈ ಸಂಘದ �ೈ�ಾ ಪ��ಾರ ಪ�ಾ��ಾ�ಗಳ �ೇಮಕ / �ಾಗೂ �ಾಮ - �ೇ�ಶಕರ ಆ"# ಆ$ಲ&'ರುವ)ದ�ಂದ ಅಹ��ಾರರ ಮನ-ಯನು/ ಈ �ಾ01ಾಲಯವ) ಪ)ರಸ#�2�ೆ �ಾಗೂ ಸಂಘದ ಪ�3ಾನ �ಾಯ�ದ4�ಗ5ಾದ 4�ೕ 6ೆಂಕ7ೇ8 ಮೂ9� , ಸಂಘದ �ೈ�ಾ ಸಂ:ೆ0 ಕಲಂ -10 (8) (O) ಉಲ&ಂ<2 ಪ�ಾ��ಾ�1ಾ$ �ಾಯ� ವ�=ಸು9>ರುವ)ದ�ಂದ , ಸಂಘದ ಪ�3ಾನ �ಾಯ�ದ4� ಹು�ೆ?ಯ ಕತ�ವ0ಗಳನು/ ಮೂಲ �ಾವ ಇತ0ಥ�6ಾಗುವವCೆಗೂ ವ�=ಸುವಂ9ಲ& �ಾಗೂ ಸಂಘದ ಪ�3ಾನ �ಾಯ�ದ4� ಹು�ೆ?ಯ ಕತ�ವ0ಗಳ ಪ�9

¶53

¶54

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶55

Dೕಜ�ೆFೆ ಆಡHತ ಮಂಡಳ �ೈ�ಾ �ೕIಾ0 ಸೂಕ> ಕ�ಮ �ೈFೊಳJKವಂIೆ �ೇ�42�ೆ .

¶56

�ಾಗೂ 4�ೕ ಆL . CಾಮಕೃಷOಪP ಮತು> 4�ೕ Q . ಕೃಷOಮೂ9� ಇವರುಗಳನು/ ಸಂಘದ �ೈ�ಾ ಸಂ:ೆ0 ಕಲಂ -6 (3) ಯಮಗಳನು/ ಉಲ&ಂ<2 �ಾಮ �ೇ�ಶಕCಾ$ _(_ �ೋ _-C¥ïÖ)_ ಆ$ �ಾಮ �ೇ�ಶನ RಾSರುವ)ದ�ಂದ _,_ ಇವರುಗಳನು/ ಈ ಕTೇ�ಯ ಮೂಲ �ಾ6ೆ ಇತ0ಥ�6ಾಗುವವCೆಗೂ ಸಂಘದ 1ಾವ)�ೇ ಚಟುವV�ೆಗಳW& Xಾಗವ=2ದಂIೆ �ೈ�ಾ �ೕIಾ0 ಸೂಕ> ಕ�ಮ-ಡಲು �ೇ�42�ೆ .

¶57

ಈ ಆ�ೇಶವನು/ '�ಾಂಕ : 15-07-2022 ರಂದು ನನ/ ಸYಸ= ಮತು> ಕTೇ�ಯZಹ��ೊಂ'Fೆ �ೊರS2�ೆ ."

¶58

The order clearly directs that the petitioner should not function as General Secretary of the Sangha till the District Registrar decides the issue in the inquiry under Section 25 of the Act.

¶59

The reason rendered by the District Registrar is that the petitioner is ineligible to hold the post of General Secretary in terms of Bye-law No.10(8), which bars any person to contest an election to the Sangha after having held office for 6 years or more. It is noted in the order that the petitioner was an office bearer for more than 6 years and, therefore, he could not be

¶60

10 -

¶61

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶62

permitted to function as General Secretary of the Sangha. There is no determination made by any judicial or quasi-judicial fora with regard to ineligibility of the petitioner. Even if it is to be made in an inquiry under Section 25 of the Act, it cannot be by way of interim relief. The District Registrar has no jurisdiction to pass an interim order of the kind that he has passed which he cannot pass even at the final stage. Therefore, what cannot be given as a final relief, is trite, cannot be ordered as an interim relief. Reasons may be manifold for the District Registrar to arrive at a decision that the petitioner was ineligible to function as General Secretary of the Sangha. But, these reasons cannot result in an order of the kind that is passed as the District Registrar is empowered to report and make suitable recommendations to the Government under Section 25 of the Act and further regulation of procedure, is at the hands of the Government. No interim order of the kind could have ever been passed by the District Registrar. Therefore, the impugned order is rendered unsustainable on the aforesaid reasons.

¶63

11 -

¶64

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶65

An application in I.A.No.1/2022 is filed in the case at

¶66

hand seeking stalling of General Body Meeting that is slated to be held on 30^th October, 2022 by virtual mode. The learned counsel for the respondents would contend that the strength on which the meeting is sought to be held by virtual mode is a Government order dated 25-08-2022. The Government order dated 25.08.2022 concerns Co-operative Societies, Banks and Souhardha Societies and not the Sangha registered under the Act of the kind that the 5^th respondent is. Therefore, it is for the Government to clarify the position and communicate it to the 5^th respondent, forthwith, for conduct of meeting either virtual or the members to be physically present in the General Body meeting. Till such clarification is issued by the Government, the meeting that is slated to be held on 30.11.2022 shall stand postponed.

¶67

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶68

O R D E R

¶69

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

¶70

(ii) The impugned order dated 15-07-2022 stands quashed.

¶71

12 -

¶72

WP No. 15111 of 2022

¶73

(iii) The 1^st respondent/District Registrar of Societies is at liberty to regulate the procedure and conclude the enquiry within next two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not earlier.

¶74

(iv) In the light of the aforesaid observations made in the course of the order, the meeting slated to be held on 30-10-2022, on the strength of the Government order dated 25-08-2022 shall not be held, till such time, the Government clarifies the position.

¶75

Sd/JUDGE

¶76

GH/nvj List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Sri D Venkatesh Murthy v. the District Registrar of Societies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri D Venkatesh Murthy v. the District Registrar of Societies

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

E S Nagaraj Vs State of Karnataka

Ocean Protiens Pvt. Ltd., Vs Marine Products Export Development Authority

M/S Ntc Exim India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Corporation Bank

K. Rajesh Vs State of Karnataka

Parikshith@ Pareekshith @ Pachu @ Parikshith Bhandary Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. Prasad Security and Cleaning Services Vs State of Karnataka