Allowed

Sri L Lohith v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC26 Sept 2022WP/9352/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition filed by a director of a Cooperative Union. The court quashed the Registrar's impugned orders passed suo-moto to amend byelaws and conduct elections, noting that the Registrar failed to consider a pending proposal for amendment from the Union. The court directed respondents to hold expeditious elections based on the law and the pending proposal.

What did the court decide?

Quashed impugned orders of the Registrar; directed respondents to hold elections expeditiously in accordance with law and the Director's proposed byelaw amendment.

Sri L Lohith Vs State of Karnataka — Election Law | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¹

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.9352 OF 2022(CS-EL/M)

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

SRI L LOHITH S/O RI L MUNICHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, DIRECTOR SRI LAKSHMI VENKATSHWARA KAIGARIKA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD. NO.58, 1^ST FLOOR, FLAT NO.304, 3^RD MAIN, 18^TH CROSS, MARGOS ROAD, MALLESHWRAM, BANGALORE-560 003.

¶6

…PETITIONER

¶7

(BY SRI.PRAKASH SHETTY.S., ADVOCATE)

¶8

AND:

¶9

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CORPORATION, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE 560001, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶10

2 . JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES BANGALORE DIVISIN, SAHAKARA SOUDHA, MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560003.

¶11

3 . THE BANGALORE CITY DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE UNION LTD, SAHAKARA SOUDHA,NO. 1/3, 3^RD MAIN ROAD, CHAMARAJPETE, BANGALORE 560018. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

¶12

4 . REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES STATE OF KARNATAKA, ALI ASKAR ROAD, BANGALORE-560003.

¶13

²

¶14

ADMINISTRATOR THE BANGALORE CITY DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE UNION LTD., SAHAKARA SOUDHA, # 1/3, 3^RD MAIN ROAD CHAMARAJPETE BENGALURU – 560 018.

¶15

RETURNING OFFICER ELECTION OF THE BANGALORE CITY DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE UNION LTD., # 1/3, 3^RD MAIN ROAD CHAMARAJPETE BENGALURU – 560 018.

¶16

(CAUSE TITLE AMENDMENT AS PER THE ORDER OF THIS HON’BLE COURT ON 26.09.2022)

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SMT. H.C.KAVITHA., HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2 & R-4, & R-5 & R-6 R-3 IS SERVED)

¶19

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN PASSING OF ORDER ANNEXURE-D DTD: 13.10.2021 AND ETC.

¶20

THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶21

ORDER

¶22

In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the

¶23

following reliefs:

¶24

i) Call for records which ultimately resulted in passing of order Annexure-D dated 13.10.2021.

¶25

ii) Issue writ, order or writ of mandamus directing Respondents No.1, 2 & 4 to hold an election to the posts of directors of the 3^rd Respondent Bangalore City District Cooperative Union Ltd as per amended Bye-law Annexure-‘B’ dated 28.1.2021 unanimously

¶26

³

¶27

passed by the General Body of the 3^rd Respondent.

¶28

iii) Issue writ, order or writ of certiorari to quash order Annexure-D dated 13.10.2021 bearing No.JRB/amednment:70:2020-21 passed by the 2^nd Respondent and declare that bye-law No.23 as per Annexure-‘B’ dated 28.1.2021 passed by the General Body of the 3^rd Respondent is deemed approval as per Section 12(2-A) of the Karnataka Cooperative Society Act and as per amended section 28A (2)(i)(d) of the Karnataka Cooperative Society Act.

¶29

iii)a) To declare the Order Annexure-H dated 28.02.2022/25.04.2022 bearing number JRB/AMD/70/2021-22 passed by the Second Respondent is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction, in the interest of justice.

¶30

iv) Grant such other reliefs as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court in the fact and circumstances of the case.

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶32

learned AGA for respondent Nos.1, 2 4, 5 and 6 and perused the material on record.

¶33

In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the Memorandum of Petition and

¶34

⁴

¶35

referring to the documents produced by the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to the Annual General Meeting dated 23.12.2020 of respondent No.3-Co-operative Union in order to point out that an unanimous resolution proposing to amend the byelaws was passed and communicated to respondent No.2-JRCS on 28.01.2021. Subsequently, after correspondence between the parties, an administrator was appointed on 04.08.2021 by the JRCS, who also proceeded to reject the proposed byelaw amendment by passing the impugned order dated 13.10.2021.

¶36

On 14.02.2022, respondent No.3-Union once again submitted proposed byelaws for approval to respondent No.2-JRCS. However, instead of considering the same, respondent No.2-JRCS issued a notice dated 18.02.2022 purporting to suo moto amend the byelaws of respondent No.3-Union by invoking his powers under Section 12(6) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short “the said Act of 1959”). Respondent No.3Union submitted its reply dated 22.02.2022, pursuant to

¶37

⁵

¶38

which respondent No.2 has proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 28.02.2022/25.04.2022 purporting to suo moto amending the byelaws and directing conducting of elections and issuing other directions. Aggrieved by the impugned orders passed by respondent No.2-JRCS, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

¶39

Per contra, in addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the Statement of Objections, learned AGA for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4 submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶40

Though several contentions have been urged by both sides on various aspects of the matter with reference to the material on record, suffice it to state that in the light of the undisputed fact that respondent No.3-Union had already submitted its proposed amendment to the byelaws for approval to respondent No.2 –JRCS on 14.02.2022, without considering the same and passing appropriate orders in accordance with law, respondent No.2 clearly committed an error in exercising suo-moto powers to amend the byelaws of respondent No.3-Union

¶41

⁶

¶42

without there being any warrant or reason to do so particularly when respondent No.3 had already submitted its proposal for amendment, which was pending consideration. In other words, in the peculiar/special facts and circumstances obtaining in the instant case, respondent No.2-JRCS was clearly not justified in invoking suo moto powers under Section 12(6) of the said Act of 1959 and the same being illegal, arbitrary and vitiated, deserves to be quashed and necessary directions are to be issued to the concerned respondents in this regard.

¶43

In the result, I pass the following:

¶44

ORDER

¶45

(i) The petition is hereby allowed .

¶46

(ii) The impugned order dated 28.02.2022/25.04.2022 at Annexure-

¶47

H/Annexure-R4 passed by respondent No.2JRCS is hereby quashed.

¶48

(iii) The concerned respondents are directed to

¶49

take necessary steps to hold elections to respondent No.3-Union without reference to

¶50

⁷

¶51

both Annexure-H/Annexure-R4 dated 22.02.2022/ 25.04.2022 as well as Annexure-B dated 28.01.2021 and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

¶52

Sd/JUDGE

¶53

Bmc

Sri L Lohith v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri L Lohith 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

Tumminakatti NO.5 Weavers Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Jupiter Express Carrier (P) Limited Vs Union of India

Colaco College Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Abhishek M Vs the State of Karnataka

Ms.Ananya Jain Vs St.Xavier College

Harsha Institute of Vs State of Karnataka