Disposed¶48

Ravikumar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Jun 2025WP/7454/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Co-operative society election stalled midway; mandamus sought to resume election from stopped stage; Rule 13D(2) KCS Rules 1960 compliance found incomplete; acknowledgment of service of voter-list scrutiny notice missing though notice and RPAD receipts on record; Administrator appointed to redo process; AGA undertaking to complete Rule 13 KCS Rules compliance within 210 days; petition disposed; Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; WP No. 7454 of 2025 (CS-EL/M); Suraj Govindaraj, J.; decided 02-06-2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of on the recorded submission of the learned AGA that the Administrator will resume and complete the Rule 13 KCS Rules compliance proceedings from the stage they were left off, expeditiously and within an outer limit of 210 days. ¶48

Ravikumar Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶48

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing Respondents 4 to 6 to conduct the election process of Hanagodu Primary Agriculture Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. from the stage where it was stopped, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶39

Court's answer

Compliance with Rule 13D(2) of the KCS Rules, 1960 was not complete: though the notice and RPAD receipts had been placed on record, the acknowledgment of service of notice had not been placed on record.

¶46

Ratio / Principle

In consequence of the incomplete Rule 13D(2) compliance, the election process was required to be redone by the Administrator now appointed.

¶46

Key takeaways

On the learned AGA's submission, recorded and accepted as the basis of disposal, the Administrator will take up the Rule 13 KCS Rules compliance proceedings from the stage they were left off and complete the same expeditiously within an outer limit of 210 days; placing this submission on record, the petition was disposed of.ratio¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 filed by six directors of Hanagodu Primary Agriculture Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. seeking a mandamus to Respondents 4 to 6 to resume the society's election process from the stage where it was stopped. The Court found that compliance with Rule 13D(2) of the KCS Rules, 1960 was incomplete — although the notice and RPAD receipts were on record, the acknowledgment of service of notice had not been placed on record — requiring the process to be redone by the Administrator now appointed. Recording the learned AGA's submission that the Administrator would take up the Rule 13 KCS Rules compliance proceedings from the stage left off and complete them within an outer limit of 210 days, the Court disposed of the petition. (Oral order of Suraj Govindaraj, J., dated 02-06-2025.)

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18577 WP No. 7454 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 7454 OF 2025 (CS-EL/M)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

RAVIKUMAR S/O NAGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

¶10

UJANIGOWDA S/O LATE MUDDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

¶11

PUTTEGOWDA S/O PUTTEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

¶12

CHANDRANAYAKA S/O LATE JAVARANAYAKA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

¶13

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

MADEVAIAH S/O KULLAMARIYAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

¶15

H R RAMESH S/O H L RANGA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS

¶16

ALL ARE DIRECTORS OF HANAGODU PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, HANAGODU VILLAGE, HUNASURU TALUK, MYSURU DIST-571105

¶17

…PETITIONERS

¶18

(BY SRI. SANDESH T B., ADVOCATE)

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18577 WP No. 7454 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

AND:

¶22

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001 REP BY ITS SECRETARY

¶23

THE REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES NO. 1, ALI ASKER ROAD BANGALORE-560052.

¶24

THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY, 3RD FLOOR, TTMC A BLOCK, K.H.ROAD, SHANTINAGAR, BANGALORE-560027, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶25

THE DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER AND ALSO DEPUTY REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES MYSORE DISTRICT- 571125

¶26

THE RETURNING OFFICER HANAGODU PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, HANAGODU VILLAGE, HUNASURU TALUK, MYSURU DIST-571105

¶27

THE VOTER LIST SCRUTINY OFFICER HANAGODU PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, HANAGODU VILLAGE, HUNASURU TALUK, MYSURU DIST-571105

¶28

HANAGODU PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, HANAGODU VILLAGE, HUNASURU TALUK, MYSURU DIST-571105 REPRESENTED BY ITS CEO

¶29

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D.NAIK., AGA FOR R1, R2, R4 TO R6; SRI. T.L. KIRAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R3;

¶30

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:18577 WP No. 7454 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

SRI. S.B. TODAD ., ADVOCATE FOR R7)

¶34

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE R4 TO R6 TO CONDUCT THE ELECTION PROCESS FROM THE STAGE WHERE IT WAS STOPPED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

¶35

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

¶36

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶37

ORAL ORDER

¶38

The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶39

a. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No.4 to 6 to conduct the election process from the stage where it was stopped, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶40

b. Issue such other order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

¶41

Notice having been issued to the Society, the Society having been called upon to place on record the documents to show compliance with Rule 13D(2) of

¶42

the KCS Rules, 1960; though the notice and the RPAD receipts have been placed on record, the

¶43

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC:18577 WP No. 7454 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

acknowledgment of service of notice has not been placed on record; hence, compliance with Rule 13D(2) of KCS Rules, 1960 is not complete, requiring the process to be redone by the Administrator now appointed.

¶47

Learned AGA submits that the Administrator will take up the proceedings of compliance with Rule 13 of KCS Rules from the stage it was left off and complete the same as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of 210 days from today.

¶48

Placing his submission on record, the petition stands

¶49

disposed .

¶50

Sd/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶51

PRS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3

Ravikumar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravikumar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Shabaz Alam Vs State of Karnataka

Dholath Khan @ Muneer Khan Vs State by

Darvez Sadiq Alias Perviz Sadique Vs State by

Udaya Kumar H v Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Geetha R N Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Krishnappa v Vs the Commissioner