Partly allowed

Bujabali S/O Baramappa Haravi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Nov 2024WP/103718/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner's proposal to collect share amounts for registering a new co-operative society was rejected without notice or hearing. Relying on Rule 3(3) and prior orders, the High Court held a hearing was mandatory, quashed the rejection, and directed grant of permission after hearing.

What did the court decide?

Rejection order dated 17.01.2024 quashed; respondent No.2 directed to grant permission to collect share amount for pre-registration after providing opportunity of hearing; petitioner to appear on 05.1

Bujabali S/O Baramappa Haravi Vs the State of… — Cooperative Societies | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.103718 OF 2024 (CS-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

BUJABALI S/O. BARAMAPPA HARAVI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, CHIEF PROMOTER, PROPOSED SWARAJYA VIVIDODESH PRATHAMIK GRAMEEN KRUSHI SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT, HARUGERI CROSS, HARUGERI, AT: HARUGERI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI, R/O: HARUGERI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN: 591 220.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. SANJANA S. MUDHOL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SHIVARAJ P. MUDHOL, SRI ANAND D. BAGEWADI, ADVOCATES)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, CHIKKODI SUB-DIVISION, CHIKKODI, AT CHIKKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN: 591 201.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17/01/2024 IN NO.AR-11/RSR/146/2023-24 PASSED BY THE 2^ND

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶20

RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-D. TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO GRANT PERMISSION TO FLOUTING OF THE SHARE AMOUNT FOR PREREGISTRATION OF THE SOCIETY IN THE NAME OF THE NIYOJIT SWARAJYAVIVIDODESH PRATHMIK GRAMEEN KRUSHI SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT, HARUGERI CROSS, HARUGERI, TALUK RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.,

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)

¶25

The present writ petition is filed seeking for the

¶26

following reliefs:

¶27

a) “To issue writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 17.01.2024 in No.AR-11/RSR/146/2023-24 passed by the 2^nd respondent vide Annexure-D. b) To issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to grant permission to flouting of the share amount for pre-registration of the society in the name of the NIYOJIT SWARAJYAVIVIDODESH PRATHMIK GRAMEEN KRUSHI SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT, HARUGERI CROSS, HARUGERI, Taluk: Raibag, Dist: Belagavi by

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶29

allowing this writ petition in the interest of Justice and equity.”

¶30

The petitioner, an agriculturist, and being a resident of Harugeri village, Chikkodi taluk, Belagavi district, sought to constitute himself and a few other such like minded persons into a new society and for the said purpose, the petitioner being the chief promoter made a proposal with requisite documents to the 2^nd respondent/Assistant Registrar requesting for permission to collect the share amounts for registration of a new co-

¶31

operative society.

¶32

It is the further case of the petitioner that the 2^nd respondent sought for a report vide letter dated 09.01.2024 (Annexure-B) from the sales officer regarding the economic viability of the proposed society and that sales officer submitted a report dated 17.01.2024 (Annexure-C). It is the contention of the petitioner that the request made by the 2^nd respondent to the sales

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶35

officer as also the report submitted by the sales officer was done without notice to the petitioner.

¶36

It is the further case of the petitioner that consequent to the said report dated 17.01.2024, the 2^nd respondent vide order dated 17.01.2024 (Annexure-D), rejected the request made by the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition is filed.

¶37

Heard submissions of learned counsel Smt.Sanjana.S.Mudhol for learned counsel Sri.Shivaraj.P.Mudhol for the petitioner and learned HCGP Smt.Kirtilata.R.Patil for the respondents.

¶38

It is the contention of the petitioner that the 2^nd respondent did not afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before the order dated 17.01.2024 (Annexure-E) was passed. It is further contended that the 2^nd respondent was required to consider the relevant aspects in terms of Rule 3(3) of the Karnataka Co-operative

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶40

Societies Rules, 1960¹ and the said aspect of the matter has not been considered.

¶41

It is further contend that in a similar fact

¶42

situation this Court in the case of Sachin S/o Anand Khot vs. The State of Karnataka and others² and in the case of Raju S/o Ravasaheb Dhang vs. The State of Karnataka and another³ , had set aside the similar orders passed by the respondent No.2. Hence, learned counsel seeks for allowing of the present writ petition and passing of suitable orders in that regard.

¶43

Per contra , learned HCGP appearing for respondents justifies the order dated 17.01.2024 (Annexure-D) and submits that respondent No.2 was required to consider the aspects as stipulated in Rule 3- B(iii) of the Rules i.e., with regard to population in the area of operation and overlapping of existing similar CoOperative Societies. The respondent No.2 has considered

¶44

1 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’

¶45

2 Order dated 06.02.2024 passed in WP No.100493/2024

¶46

3 Order dated 29.05.2024 passed in WP No.101951/2024

¶47

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶48

the said aspects to the matter and has passed the order dated 17.01.2024 (Annexure-D) which is just and proper. Hence, the learned HCGP seeks for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶49

The submissions of both the learned counsels

¶50

have been considered and the material on record have been perused.

¶51

The relevant facts situation insofar as the petitioner having made proposal for opening a CoOperative Society is undisputed. It is further undisputed that prior to passing of the order bearing No.AR11/RSR/146/2023-24 dated 17.01.2024 (Annexure-D), the respondent No.2 did not notify the petitioner.

¶52

Rule 3(3) of the Rules which reads as follows:

¶53

“3. Formalities for registration .

¶54

(3) The Registrar on being satisfied that, the proposed society has reasonable chances of success and is going to be economically viable may permit the chief promoter to collect such amount of share capital from such number of persons intending to become the

¶55

¶56

NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶57

members of the proposed society within such period as he may specify.”

¶58

This Court in the case of Sachin S/o Anand

¶59

Khot¹ considering a similar fact situation has held as follows:

¶60

“3. The petitioner submitted an application only for permission to collect shares with an intention to establish a co-operative society and at this state respondent No.3 ought not to have rejected the application since the question of economic viability and chances of success of the co-operative society to be established is a matter, which requires to be considered at the time of registration.

¶61

4. Rule 3 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961, deals with formalities for registration and sub-rule (3) states that the registrar on being satisfied that the proposed society has reasonable chances of success and is going to be economically viable may permit the chief promoter to collect such amount of share capital from such number of persons intending to become the members of the proposed society within such period as he may specify. In other words, the registrar is under an obligation to hear the petitioner to satisfy himself that the proposed

¶62

¶63

NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶64

society has reasonable chances of success and is going to be economically viable.

¶65

5. In the instant case, respondent No.3 without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to satisfy that the proposed society has reasonable chances of success and is going to be economically viable, has rejected the application and the same is in violation of principles of natural justice.

¶66

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the 3^rd respondent at Annexure-E is hereby quashed.

¶67

7. Respondent No.3 to grant permission to collect the share amount for pre-registration of Doodh Ganga Vividhoddesha Prathamik Grameena Krushi Sahakari Sangha Niyamita, Hombaradi, Nippani talulka, subject to petitioner satisfying other requirements of law, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶68

8. Petitioner to be present before respondent No.3 on 20.02.2024 at 11.00 a.m. without awaiting for further notice from respondent No.3.”

¶69

(emphasis supplied)

¶70

It is clear that this Court has held that respondent No.2 is under an obligation to hear the

¶71

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶72

petitioner while passing the order under Rule 3 of the Rules.

¶73

The order dated 17.01.2024 (Annexure-D)

¶74

having been passed without hearing the petitioner, on this ground alone, the relief sought for in the present writ petition is liable to be granted.

¶75

Although it is the vehement contention of the learned HCGP that having regard to the stipulations contained under Rule 3-B(iii) of the Rules, respondent No.2 considered the said aspect to the matter, the request made by the petitioner in the present writ petition is liable to be rejected, it is relevant to note that this Court having held that respondent No.2 was under an obligation to hear the petitioner before satisfying himself as to the requisites as contemplated under Rule 3(iii) of the Rules, respondent No.2 recording his findings with regard to the aspects as detailed under Rule 3-B(iii) of the Rules with affording an opportunity to the petitioner is erroneous and liable to be interfered with.

¶76

10 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16705 WP No. 103718 of 2024

¶77

In view of the aforementioned, the following: ORDER

¶78

i) The writ petition is partly allowed .

¶79

ii) The order bearing No.AR11/RSR/146/2023-24 dated 17.01.2024 (Annexure-D) passed by respondent No.2 is hereby quashed.

¶80

iii) Respondent No.2 to grant permission to collect share amount for pre-registration of Niyojit Swarajyavividodesh Prathmik Grameen Krushi Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Harugeri Cross, Harugeri subject to the petitioner satisfying other requirements of law after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶81

iv) The petitioner shall appear before respondent No.2 on 05.12.2024 at 11.00

¶82