Disposed

N Suresh v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Nov 2022WP/21067/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the election calendar of a cooperative society, the Court found that the respondent associations were not state instrumentalities under Article 12. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, with liberty reserved for the petitioner to approach a civil court via a suit.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to avail remedy of suit in accordance with law; costs made easy.

N Suresh Vs State of Karnataka — Cooperative Societies | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.21067 OF 2022(GM-KSR)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

N SURESH, S/O NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, EX PRESIDENT, BENGALURU DISTRICT COMMITTEE, R/O NO.6 3RD MAIN VINAYAKA NAGAR, KAMAKSHIPALYA, BENGALURU-560 079.

¶8

… PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI.DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATION, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶12

DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES 4^TH CIRCLE, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT AND DISTRICT, REGISTRAR SAHAKARA SOWDHA , 3^RD MAIN ROAD, 8^TH CROSS ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU-560 003.

¶13

¶14

KARNATAKA STATE LICENCED ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION (REGD), BENGALURU CENTRAL COMMITTEE, NO.33, AVENUE ROAD, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶15

KARNATAKA STATE LICENCED ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION (REGD) BENGALURU DISTRICT COMMITTEE, NO.33, AVENUE ROAD, BENGALURU. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (RESPONDENT NO.3 & 4 ARE REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1960)

¶16

UBRAN PINTO, RETURNING OFFICER APPOINTED TO HOLD ELECTIONS FOR KARNATAKA STATE LICENCED ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, NO.33, AVENUE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 002.

¶17

… RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. B V KRISHNA,AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI.PRITHVI WODEYAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH CALENDAR OF EVENTS ISSUED BY THE R5 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This petition seeks to lay a challenge to the imminent election of popular bodies to the 3^rd Respondent-Society. Learned AGA on request accepts notice for Respondents 1 & Respondent No.3 is represented by a private counsel.

¶24

Both learned AGA and the private counsel

¶25

oppose the petition contending that the writ petition is misconceived under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of

¶26

India, inasmuch as, Respondents 3, 4 & 5 are not instrumentalities of the State in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in R.D.SHETTY vs. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY, AIR 1979 SC 1628 and therefore the challenge to the action in question is unsustainable.

¶27

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

¶28

and having perused the petition papers, this Court is broadly in agreement with the submissions made on behalf of the respondent consistent with the law laid down by the

¶29

¶30

Apex Court in R.D.SHETTY supra and therefore, declines indulgence.

¶31

However the above having been said, , this Court

¶32

finds prima facie some arguable case in view of the argued infirmities. Since the status of answering Respondents does not answer definition of state u/a 12 of the Constitution, indulgence is not granted.

¶33

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed off reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail remedy of suit in accordance with law. All contentions in that connection are kept open.

¶34

Costs made easy.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

Snb/

N Suresh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N Suresh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri C Mahesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Jamia Masjid Sunni (Wakf) Yelahanka Vs the Land Tribunal North (Addl)

Manjunath K.M. Vs the State of Karnataka

Sunil Abraham Vs Reeth Abraham

Madegowda Vs Tahasildar

Kasturi Rangan Vs the State of Karnataka