Bholakodi Milk Producers Co-Operative Societies… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Bholakodi Milk Producers Co-Operative Societies… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed; impugned order dated 16.4.2025 (Annexure-H) quashed; matter remitted to Respondent No.2 for fresh consideration; counsel for petitioners and for Respondent Nos.5, 6 and 8 directed to appear before Respondent No.2 on 24.06.2025 at 3.00 p.m. without notice; detailed project report on the proposed case-management system to be filed within four weeks; petition disposed with re-listing on 22.07.2025 for reporting compliance; expressly no observations on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 16.4.2025 passed by Respondent No.2 (Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies) — issued when petitioner No.2 was absent and after only a one-day adjournment from 15.4.2025 — violated the principles of natural justice by denying him sufficient opportunity to represent his case, and is therefore liable to be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

The one-day short adjournment (from 15.4.2025 to 16.4.2025) granted while petitioner No.2 was absent was in violation of the principles of natural justice; petitioner No.2 ought to have been given sufficient opportunity to represent his case.

Ratio / Principle

Orders passed by the quasi-judicial officers of the Cooperative Societies are neither web-hosted nor communicated to the parties and counsel; the only manner in which a party or counsel can ascertain the next date of hearing is by physically visiting the office of the concerned quasi-judicial officer.

Key takeaways

Unless there is some extreme urgency, there is no requirement for a quasi-judicial officer to adjourn a matter by one day, since doing so deprives the party of ascertaining the next date of hearing.ratio¶69
General direction issued to the Principal Secretary, Cooperation Department and the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to implement, for all quasi-judicial officers of the Cooperation Department, a system similar to the Revenue Department's 'Revenue Court Case Management System', so that all orders passed by quasi-judicial officers are uploaded on the relevant website and communicated to the concerned party and counsel by SMS/WhatsApp and e-mail.ratio¶70

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P. No. 12773 of 2025 (CS-RES), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (Suraj Govindaraj J.), decided 12.06.2025 (NC: 2025:KHC:20199). Petitioners — a primary milk producers' co-operative society and its delegate (Sadashiva Shetty, elected Director on 12.8.2023 and President on 19.8.2023 of Respondent No.4 society, now disqualified) — sought certiorari against the order dated 16.04.2025 of the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Kundapura (Respondent No.2) in Sani/38/Samanya/13/Anaharthe/2023-2024 (Annexure-H), arising from proceedings commenced on a CDO's report and show-cause notice dated 17.5.2024; prayers against rejection of nomination papers (19.04.2025) and for leave to vote in the 26.04.2025 union election were not pressed. HELD: the one-day adjournment (15.04.2025 to 16.04.2025) granted while petitioner No.2 was absent violated the principles of natural justice, because orders of co-operative quasi-judicial officers are neither web-hosted nor communicated to parties/counsel, who can learn the next hearing date only by physically visiting the office; hence, absent extreme urgency, one-day adjournments must not be granted and sufficient opportunity must be afforded. RESULT: Writ petition allowed; Annexure-H order quashed; matter remitted to Respondent No.2 for fresh consideration with no observations on merits. DIRECTIONS: implement a system akin to the Revenue Department's 'Revenue Court Case Management System' for all quasi-judicial officers of the Cooperation Department (online upload of orders; communication to parties and counsel by SMS/WhatsApp/e-mail); detailed project report within four weeks; compliance reporting listed on 22.07.2025.

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.12773 OF 2025 (CS-RES)

BETWEEN:

BHOLAKODI MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES LTD. BOLAKODI POST KARKALA TALUK-576 121 REPRESENTED BY ITS DELEGATE SADASHIVA SHETTY S/O.SHANKAR SHETTY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SADASHIVA SHETTY S/O.SHANKAR SHETTY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT POSARARMA BOLA, KARKALA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT PRESIDENT AND NOW DISQUALIFIED BOLA VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA BOLA, KARKALLA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI DEVIPRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION M.S.BUILDING DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

HC-KAR

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES KUNDAPURA SUB-DIVISION KUNDAPURA UDUPI DISTRICT-576 201

DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS SOCIETIES UNION LTD. MANGALORE DAIRY ROAD KULASEKARA MANGALURU-575 005 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR (REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT,1959)

BOLA VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA BOLA, KARKALLA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-574 110 REPRESENTED BY ITS IN CHARGE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. (REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959)

K.MURALIDHAR SHARMA S/O.VAMANA SHARMA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

SURYAKANTH SHETTY S/O.GOPALA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

JAYARAMA SALIAN S/O.KITTA POOJARI AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

HC-KAR

PRAVEEN SALIAN S/O.BHOJA POOJARI AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

GANAPATHI BHAT S/O.PUNDALIKA BHAT AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

DIVYA NAYAK W/O.ANAND RAYA NAYAK AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

RESPONDENT NOS.4 TO 9 ARE THE DIRECTORS OF BOLA VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA BOLA, KARKALLA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-574 110

RETURNING OFFICER DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS SOCIETIES UNION LTD. MANGALORE DAIRY ROAD KULASEKARA, MANGALURU-575 005 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI RAKSHITH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R5 & ALSO FOR R-6 & R-8; SRI YOGESH D.NAIK, AGA FOR R-1, R-2 & R-11; SRI ABHINAV R., ADVOCATE FOR R-3; R-4, R-7, R-9 & R-10 ARE SERVED)

THIS WRIT PEITITON IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2025 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 IN SANI/38/SAMANYA/13/ANAHARTHE/ 2023-2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND REJECTION OF THE NOMINATION PAPERS OF THE PETITIONERS DATED 19.04.2025 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.11 VIDE ANNEXURE-M ETC.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

HC-KAR

THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the

following reliefs:

"i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order passed by the respondent no 2 dated 16/04/2025 in Sani/38/samanya/13/ anaharthe/2023-24 is herewith produced as Annexure-H.

ii) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the rejection of the nomination papers of the petitioners dated 19/04/2025 passed by the respondent no.11 is herewith produced as Annexure M.

iii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no 11 to permit the petitioner to contest and cast his vote in the election to the respondent no 3 union scheduled to be held on 26/04/2025 by accepting the nomination papers of the petitioner no 1 in the interest of justice and equity.

iv) Such other direction or order writ as may deem fit to this Hon'ble Court may kindly be issued."

At the outset, learned counsel for petitioners submits that

he would not be pressing prayers at (ii) and (iii) above

and hence, the same have not been considered in the present petition.

The submission of Sri Deviprasad Shetty, learned counsel

for petitioners is that the petitioner no.2 was elected as a

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

HC-KAR

Director of the Respondent No.4 – society on 12.8.2023 and as President of the said society on 19.8.2023 and his term would end in the year 2028. Petitioner No.2 was also delegate of the petitioner No.1 - society in the elections to the Respondent No.3 - Union.

A report was submitted to the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies (ARCS) by the Chief Development Officer (CDO) and on which basis notice was issued on 17.5.2024 seeking explanation of the petitioner No.2, which was replied to by the petitioner No.2 on 28.5.2024 and additional reply was submitted on 21.6.2024.

Thereafter, proceedings have been taken up, though several actions were taken on several dates, the relevant date is 31.3.2025 when the respondents filed their documents, the matter came to be adjourned to 15.4.2025 for the petitioner to produce documents, which he wants to rely upon. On 15.4.2025, petitioner No.2 was not present and the matter was adjourned to 16.4.2025, on the said date, again noticing that the petitioner was absent, the impugned order came to be passed which is challenged in the present petition.

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

HC-KAR

Sri Rakshith Kumar, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.5,6 and 8 i.e., the other Directors of the 4^th respondent submits that the petitioner No.2 was present on 31.3.2025 and therefore, he was required to be present on the adjourned date i.e., 15.4.2025. On 15.4.2025, petitioner No.2 was not present and the matter was adjourned to 16.4.2025, therefore he submits that the 2^nd respondent has granted sufficient opportunity to the petitioner no.2, which has not been made use of the by the petitioner No.2 and as such the order passed on 16.4.2025 taking into consideration the documents submitted by the 4^th respondent – society and the same does not require interference.

Sri Abhinav, learned counsel for Respondent No.3 – Union justifies the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent.

Learned AGA submits that it is the duty of the concerned litigants to be present before the 2^nd respondent – ARCS on the date on which the matter is posted and petitioner no.2 being not present, the impugned order is passed.

7 -

NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

HC-KAR

Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the records.

The proceedings commenced on 24.5.2024 and went on till April-2025. A perusal of the order sheet indicates that on some occasions, petitioner no.2 has not been present and on other occasions, respondents have not been present. On 31.3.2025, the respondents had filed 13 documents and the matter was adjourned to 15.4.2025 for the petitioner to produce documents, which he wanted to rely upon. On 15.4.2025, petitioner No.2 was not present and matter was adjourned to 16.4.2025 i.e, the very next day and on the said date noticing that the petitioner No.2 was not present, the impugned order came to be passed.

I am of the considered opinion that short adjournment granted for one day is in violation of principles of natural justice and the petitioner No.2 ought to have been given sufficient opportunity to represent his case.

This aspect is relevant to be taken into account for the reason that the order passed by any of the quasi judicial

8 -

NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

HC-KAR

officers of the Cooperative Societies are neither webhosted nor communicated to the parties and the counsel and, then only manner a party or counsel can ascertain the next date of hearing of the matter would be by physically visiting the office of the concerned quasi judicial officer. In that view of the matter, unless there is some extreme urgency, there is no requirement for the quasi judicial officer to adjourn the matter by one day, which would deprive the party of ascertaining the next date of hearing.

Be that as it may, it would also be required that general direction to be issued to the Principal Secretary, Cooperation Department and Registrar of Co-operative Societies to ensure that a system similar to that implemented by the Revenue Department, ‘ Revenue Court Case Management System ’ be implemented for all quasi judicial officers of the Cooperation Department so that all the orders passed by quasi judicial officers are uploaded on the relevant website and communicated to the concerned party and the counsel by way of SMS/WhatsApp and e.mail.

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

HC-KAR

The detailed project report to be placed before this Court within four weeks from today . If necessary, the Prl. Secretary, Cooperation Department can take the assistance of the Principal Secretary, E-Governance Department and the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department.

In view of the above, I pass the following:

ORDER

i) Writ Petition is allowed .

ii) The impugned order dated 16.4.2025 passed by the 2^nd respondent vide Annexure-H is quashed.

iii) The matter is remitted to the Respondent No.2 for fresh consideration.

iv) Since the order is passed in presence of counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for Respondent Nos.5,6 and 8, they shall be present before the Respondent No.2 on 24^th June 2025 and 3.00 p.m. without requirement of any notice.

NC: 2025:KHC:20199 WP No. 12773 of 2025

10 -

HC-KAR

v) This Court has not made any observations on the merits of the matter and it is for the 2^nd respondent to decide the matter.

vi) Though the above petition is disposed, re-list on 22.07.2025 for reporting compliance.

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

GSS

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22