Disposed

K. S. Premakumari v. Karnataka State Co-Operative Marketing Mahamandal Ltd.

Karnataka HC29 Aug 2024WP/23014/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a stay of the Office Managers' seniority list granted by the Additional Registrar in a co-operative dispute, contending Rule 20(f) KCS Rules was misapplied and they were not impleaded. The court declined to decide merits and directed the authority to implead affected persons and dispose of the appeal within three months.

What the court decided

AI extract

K. S. Premakumari Vs Karnataka State Co-Operative… — Cooperative Societies | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:34754 WP No. 23014 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 23014 OF 2024 (S-PRO)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

K. S. PREMAKUMARI D/O LATE. SIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS WORKING AS ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY OFFICE AT MARKETING FEDERATION NO.8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU-560052.

¶8

C. PILLEGOWDA C/O S CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS WORKING AS MANAGER OFFICE AT MARKETING FEDERATION NO.8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU-560052.

¶9

Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

(BY SRI. PRITHVEESH M.K. ADVOCATE FOR SRI.RANGANATH R., ADVOCATE)

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

AND:

¶13

KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING MAHAMANDAL LTD NO.8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU-560052 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶14

MALLIKARJUN MALLAMMANAVAR S/O THIRUKAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NO.103, CONCEPT ALLEY APARTMENT

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:34754 WP No. 23014 of 2024

¶17

DOLLARS COLONY, GOKUL ROAD HUBBALLI-580030.

¶18

ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (CONSUMPTION AND SALES), NO.1, ALI ASKOR ROAD, BANGALORE-52.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 12.08.2024 IN DISPUTE NO. ANI(B AND MA)/D3/DIS/03/202324 VIDE ANNX-A. QUASH THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THE R-1 IN DISPUTE NO. ANI(B AND MA)/D3/DIS/03/2023-24 VIDE ANNX-A. QUASH THE DISPUTE NO. 3/2024 DTD. 31.01.2024 FILED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNX-B.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

The petitioners have challenged an order passed by respondent No.3 dated 12.08.2024 staying the Seniority List of Office Managers in respondent No.1. They have also sought to quash the proceedings in Dispute No.3/2024 pending before respondent No.3. Consequently, they have sought for a writ in the nature of Mandamus to consider the final seniority list dated 29.01.2024 bearing No.Sibbandi/359/2023-24 (III) issued by respondent No.1.

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:34754 WP No. 23014 of 2024

¶25

The respondent No.2 filed an appeal before respondent No.3 challenging the Seniority List prepared by respondent No.1 in respect of Office Managers. An application was filed by respondent No.2 for stay of the Seniority List prepared. The respondent No.3, after considering the applicability of Rule 20(f) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'KCS Rules'), granted an order of stay of the seniority list. The petitioners, being aggrieved by the said order, have filed this petition.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that respondent No.2 did not array the petitioners as parties in the proceedings before respondent No.3. They contended that the respondent No.3 wrongly applied Rule 20(f) of KCS Rules, which did not concern with inter se seniority but was applicable only for the purpose of leave and allowances. Therefore, they contended that the impugned order of stay granted by respondent No.3 is incorrect and deserves interference.

¶27

Respondent No.2 had filed an appeal before respondent No.3 challenging the seniority list prepared by respondent No.1. The respondent No.3 exercising discretion, had granted the order of stay of the seniority list. However,

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:34754 WP No. 23014 of 2024

¶29

while doing so, he must have been mindful of the fact that the order of stay would adversely affect persons in the seniority list. Therefore, he must have ideally exercised jurisdiction to implead all those persons whose names were found in the seniority list and then consider the appeal on merits. The respondent No.3 therefore needs to be sensitized to implead all the persons concerned who would be affected by any order that may be passed in the appeal and thereafter dispose off the appeal on merits. Alternatively, the respondent No.3 shall, without reservation entertain any applications that may be filed by the persons who may be affected by the final order that may be passed and implead them.

¶30

In that view of the matter, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the writ petition and also without expressing opinion on the applicability of Rule 20(f) of KCS Rules, it is appropriate to direct the respondent No.3 to dispose off the proceedings before him after impleading the affected persons whose names are found in the seniority list, within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The petitioners are also entitled to

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:34754 WP No. 23014 of 2024

¶33

file appropriate application before respondent No.3 for vacating the order of stay.

¶34

All contentions are kept open.

¶35

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶36

THM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28

K. S. Premakumari v. Karnataka State Co-Operative Marketing Mahamandal Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

K. S. Premakumari v. Karnataka State Co-Operative Marketing Mahamandal Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. v. Lokesh Vs the State of Karnataka

A S Mallikarjunaswamy M.Sc., M.Phil., Vs the Principal Secretary of the Govt of Karnataka

Sri P Venkataiah Vs State of Karnataka

B Shivagangappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr. Mamatha. B. S. Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Sameena Yasmin Vs the Accountant General (a and E)