Dismissed

M/S. Mysore Taluk Co-Operative v. the Under Secretary to Government

Karnataka HC3 Jul 2023WP/12483/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the Karnataka High Court heard a writ petition challenging an order for re-examination of a cooperative society's accounts. The court found the order valid as details were disclosed and the petitioner was given an opportunity to explain. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution was dismissed with no orders as to costs.

M/S. Mysore Taluk Co-Operative Vs the Under… — Cooperative Societies | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:22791 WP No. 12483 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 12483 OF 2023 (CS-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

M/S. MYSORE TALUK CO-OPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD., NO.1084/1, SHIVASARANARA MEDHA KETHESHWARA DHWARA, DHANWANTRI ROAD,

¶10

MYSURU – 570 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SHARADA.H.M. REGISTERED UNDER SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1959.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. RUPESH KUMAR S., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMETN OF CO-OPERATION, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶16

THE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE OF CO-OPERATIVE AUDIT, NO.17, JAYANIVAS, SHANKARMUTT ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU – 560 004.

¶17

¶18

NC: 2023:KHC:22791 WP No. 12483 of 2023

¶19

3. K.B. PRAKASH,

¶20

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE OF CO-OPERATIVE AUDIT, HUNASURU – 571 105.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT.A.R.SHARADAMBA, AGA)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.02.2023 PASSED BY THE R1 AUTHORITY IN ORDER BEARING NO.CO.09-CLM-2023 (E), BENGALURU AS PER ANNEXURE - A AND ORDER DATED 06.03.2023 PASSED BY THE R2 AUTHORITY DATED 06.03.2023 AS PER ANNEXURE – B AND ETC.,

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶27

Matter is coming up for preliminary hearing.

¶28

The petitioner-Society is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 02.02.2023 at Annexure-A passed

¶29

by respondent No.1-Under Secretary to Government, Cooperation Department and the consequential order of

¶30

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:22791 WP No. 12483 of 2023

¶31

appointment of respondent No.3 for re-examination of the accounts of the petitioner-Society in terms of Section 63(13-A) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

¶32

On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Advocate and on perusing the petitioner papers, this Court finds that as sought to be contended by the petitioner-Society, though action is said to have been initiated by the competent authority under Section 63(13-A) on the basis of a complaint said to have been made by one Sri. Ashok, which finds reference in Annexure-B order, nevertheless, the State Government, before granting approval has given all the details of the defects found in the accounts of the petitioner-Society for the relevant period. Nothing is stated about the complaint said to have been filed by one Sri. Ashok. Moreover, during the course of the reexamination at the hands of respondent No.3 full opportunity will be available to the petitioner to answer

¶33

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:22791 WP No. 12483 of 2023

¶34

the queries of respondent No.3-Officer. If respondent No.3 is satisfied with the explanation offered by the petitioner society, then there may not be any need to direct the petitioner society to set right the lapses. However, if it is found that there are lapses and the same required rectifications, the petitioner society will have to rectify the same in accordance with law.

¶35

For the foregoing reasons, this Court, having been satisfied that no infirmity can be found in the impugned orders at Annexures-A and B, proceeds to dismiss the writ petition.

¶36

Ordered accordingly.

¶37

Sd/JUDGE

¶38

M/S. Mysore Taluk Co-Operative v. the Under Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Mysore Taluk Co-Operative v. the Under Secretary to Government

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

H.S.Nagarathna, Vs Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike

Ananda Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs Mysore Urban Development Authority

Mr Gourishankar Chegaraddi Vs Waylink Pitstop Solutions

Velu B Pethi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Manu Perumunda S Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri D Mohankumar Vs the State of Karnataka