Partly allowed

Smt Chandramma v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Feb 2024WP/1514/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed writ petition in-part, directing Returning Officer to announce election results by counting petitioners' votes held on 24.01.2024. Eligibility dispute kept open for adjudication under Section 70(2)(c) of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

What did the court decide?

Returning Officer to announce election results by counting petitioners' votes; eligibility dispute kept open to be decided under Section 70(2)(c) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

Smt Chandramma Vs the State of Karnataka — Election Law | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:6177 WP No. 1514 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 1514 OF 2024 (CS-EL/M)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT CHANDRAMMA, SHARE NO 16, W/O SIDDALINGACHAR, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,

¶9

SMT JAYAMMA, SHARE NO 17, W/O MUNISHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,

¶10

SMT SAVITHAMMA SHARE NO 23, W/O CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

¶11

SMT GOWRAMMA SHARE NO 24, W/O SOONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,

¶12

Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SMT GEETHA, SHARE NO 25, D/O SOONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

¶14

SMT VEENAMMA, SHARE NO 36, W/O SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

¶15

SMT SUGUNAMMA, SHARE NO 38, W/O NARAYANAGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

¶16

SMT ANUSUYAMMA, SHARE NO 40, W/O MUNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:6177 WP No. 1514 of 2024

¶18

SMT NETHRA, SHARE NO 58, W/O MUNIKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

¶19

SMT CHINNAMMA, SHARE NO 59, W/O NGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

¶20

SMT PRAVATHAMMA SHARE NO 61, W/O NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

¶21

SMT MANJULA SHARE NO 63, W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

¶22

SMT VENKATAMMA SHARE NO 64, W/O CHIKKADALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,

¶23

SMT RATHNAMMA SHARE NO 66, W/O JUNJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

¶24

SMT NARASAMMA SHARE NO 86, W/O VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

¶25

SMT NAGAVENI SHARE NO 88, W/O SRINIVASH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

¶26

SMT LALITHAMBA V S SHARE NO 91, D/O SIDDALINGACHAR, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

¶27

SMT LAKSHMAMMA SHARE NO 117, W/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:6177 WP No. 1514 of 2024

¶29

SMT PAVITHRA

¶30

SHARE NO 124, W/O RAVIKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

¶31

SMT NAGAVENI SHARE NO 137, W/O ASHWATHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT VARADENAHALLI VILLAGE, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562135.

¶32

…PETITIONERS

¶33

(BY SRI P MAHADEVASWAMY, ADVOCATE)

¶34

AND:

¶35

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY PRL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE, M S BUILDING, BANGALORE 560001.

¶36

THE STATE OF CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION COMMISSION, 3^RD FLOOR, SHANTHINAGAR, TTMC A BLOCK, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027, REP. BY SECRETARY.

¶37

DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562135.

¶38

RETURNING OFFICER, APPOINTED FOR VARADENAHALLI HALU UTHPADAKARA MAHILA SAHAKARA SANGA LTD,, VARADENAHALLI VILLAGE, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562135.

¶39

VARADENAHALLI HALU UTHPADAKARA MAHILA SAHAKARA SANGA LTD., REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VARADENAHALLI VILLAGE, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562135.

¶40

(REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP SOCIETIES ACT 1959).

¶41

…RESPONDENTS

¶42

(BY SRI SIDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA FOR R1, R3 & R4 SRI T L KIRAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2, SRI N RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R5)

¶43

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:6177 WP No. 1514 of 2024

¶44

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT SECTION 20(2)(a-iv) AND (a-v) THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT IS ULTRA VIRUS THE LEGISLATIVE COMPETENCE AND ARTICLE 243 ZI AND 243 ZO OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ETC.

¶45

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

¶46

ORDER

¶47

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State.

¶48

Secretary of the respondent No.5 -Society is present before this Court.

¶49

This Writ Petition is essentially filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to include the names of the petitioners in the final eligible voters' list and permit the petitioners to vote in the election to the Board of respondent No.5-Society which was scheduled on 24.01.2024.

¶50

This Court by way of interim order permitted the petitioners to cast vote in the said election. However, the result of the election was withheld.

¶51

¶52

NC: 2024:KHC:6177 WP No. 1514 of 2024

¶53

The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the mandatory requirements of Rule 13-D(2-A) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 have not been followed while preparing the eligible and ineligible voters' list. Thus, it is urged that the petitioners should be treated as eligible voters' and their votes need to be counted as valid votes.

¶54

Learned counsel for the 5^th respondent - Society would fairly submit that the Society has not followed the mandatory requirements of the aforementioned Rule. No specific objection is raised relating to the eligibility of the petitioners to contest in the election.

¶55

At this juncture, it is brought to the notice of this

¶56

Court that in similar circumstances, this Court in the case of

¶57

H S RAJU AND OTHERS vs STATE OF KARNATAKA AND

¶58

OTHERS (2022(4) AKR 775) has permitted the votes to be counted and the election results to be announced keeping open all other contentions to be adjudicated in appropriate forum under Section 70(2) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

¶59

¶60

NC: 2024:KHC:6177 WP No. 1514 of 2024

¶61

It is relevant to note that merely because the petitioners were permitted to vote in the election to the Board of the respondent-Society, it does not mean that all the petitioners had the eligibility to vote in the election. It is quite possible that all or some had the eligibility to vote or may had incurred disqualification to vote. Merely because procedures contemplated under Rule 13-D(2-A) of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 are not followed, it does not mean that the disqualification if any incurred, is cured. Whether the petitioners did incur the disqualification to vote or not, is a question of fact. Same is to be decided in a proceeding under Section 70(2)(c) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

¶62

Hence, the following:

¶63

ORDER

¶64

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed in-part .

¶65

(ii) Returning Officer shall announce the results of the election to the Board of 5^th respondent - Society held on 24.01.2024 by counting the votes of the petitioners.

¶66

¶67

NC: 2024:KHC:6177 WP No. 1514 of 2024

¶68

(iii) If any person entitled to raise a dispute under Section 70(2)(c) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, raises a dispute under the said provision questioning the eligibility of the petitioners to vote in the election to the Board of respondentSociety, the said dispute shall be decided without being influenced by the interim order granted by this Court permitting the petitioners to vote in the election to the board of respondent-Society. It is made clear that this Court while granting interim order in favour of the petitioners, did not give any finding on the eligibility of the petitioners to vote in the election to the Board of the respondent-Society.

¶69

(iv) The question as to the eligibility of the petitioners to vote in the election is kept open to be decided in a dispute if any, raised in this regard.

¶70

(v) If any such dispute relating to the eligibility of the petitioners to vote in the election to the Board of respondent-Society is raised, the effect of holding the petitioners ineligible to vote and excluding such votes and excluding ineligible candidates on the final outcome of the election results shall also be taken into account before passing final orders.

¶71

(vi) The ballot papers containing the votes cast by the petitioners shall be kept in a separate sealed box after counting.

¶72

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:6177 WP No. 1514 of 2024

¶73

(vii) While counting the votes cast by the petitioners, a separate list shall be prepared disclosing the number of votes cast by the petitioners in favour of the candidates. Said list shall be separately maintained and be furnished to the authority, if summoned, while hearing election dispute in case such dispute is raised.

¶74

Sd/JUDGE

¶75

GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23

Smt Chandramma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Chandramma v. the 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

The Virajpet Agricultural Produce Co-Operative Marketing Society Ltd., Vs Smt. K.N. Parvathy

Sri Honnegowda Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Preerambi Vs the Davanagere Urban Co. Op Society Bank Ltd.

Muniraju. N Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Radha Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri G S Mahadeva, Vs the State of Karnataka