Sri. P R Chandra Reddy Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri. P R Chandra Reddy Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; liberty reserved to the petitioners to agitate their grounds in appropriate civil proceedings.

Issue for consideration

Whether the State/respondent authorities were required to take a decision on the Enquiry Report dated 22.09.2022 notwithstanding its finding that the allegations made by the petitioners were not established.

Court's answer

Where an Enquiry Report is clear and categorical that the allegations are not borne out or established, and the complainant furnished no further proof despite being called upon to do so, it is not required for the State to take any decision on such an Enquiry Report.

Ratio / Principle

The question of the State taking a decision on an enquiry report would only arise when the allegations are established.

Key takeaways

Since the issue relates to a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, the petition was disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioners to agitate any grounds they may have in appropriate civil proceedings.ratio¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Mandamus to act on Enquiry Report — Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to take a decision on the Enquiry Report dated 22.09.2022 (Annexure-M) and alternatively a fresh enquiry or a recommendation for appointing an Administrator u/s.27-A of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act. Held: the Enquiry Officer had clearly stated that, from the documents available, the allegations made by the complainant-petitioners had not been established; the question of the State taking a decision on the report would arise only when the allegations were established; where the report is clear and categorical that the allegations are not borne out and no further proof was furnished despite opportunity, the State is not required to take any decision on it. Petition disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioners to agitate their grounds in appropriate civil proceedings, the subject being a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960.

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:34715 WP No. 15668 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

WRIT PETITION NO. 15668 OF 2024 (GM-KSR)

BETWEEN:

SRI. P R CHANDRA REDDY S/O P RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS R/O GIRANI THIMMAREDDY BUILDING OLD BUS STAND, JAGALUR TOWN DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577528.

SRI SATISH P C S/O P R CHANDRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/O GIRANI THIMMAREDDY BUILDING OLD BUS-STAND, JAGALUR TOWN DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577528.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SAGAR B B., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES ROOM NO.52-53. D C OFFICE COMPLEX DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANGERE-577001.

THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:34715 WP No. 15668 of 2024

HC-KAR

ROOM O.52-3, D C OFFICE COMPLEX DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-577001.

THE SECRETARY JNANA VIKASA EDUCATION CENTRE (R) MARENAHALLI ROAD JAGALURU TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577528.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.PANINI A H., AGA FOR R1 TO R3: SRI MOHANA CHANDRA., ADVOCATE FOR R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 2^ND RESPONDENT TO TAKE DECISION ON THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 22-09-2022 AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS, ANNEXURE-M IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ISSUE A DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE ENQUIRY OFFICER TO CONDUCT FRESH ENQUIRY AS ALL THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE PETITIONERS ARE NOT CONSIDERED AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, 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 mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent to take decision on the enquiry report dated 22-09-2022 and pass appropriate orders,Annexure-M in the interest of justice and equity;

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:34715 WP No. 15668 of 2024

HC-KAR

ii) Issue a direction, directing the Enquiry Officer to conduct fresh enquiry as all the contentions raised by the Petitioners are not considered, in the interest of justice. OR

iii) Issue appropriate direction directing the 2nd Respondent to recommend to the Government for appointing Administrator u/s.27-A of The Karnataka Societies Registration Act, ill fresh enquiry is completed in the interest of justice and equity;

iv) Pass any other appropriate order or direction deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.”

An Enquiry Report having been submitted by respondent No.2 on 22.09.2022, the petitioners are before this Court for issuance of mandamus directing the State to take a decision on the Enquiry Report.

A perusal of the Enquiry Report indicates that the Enquiry Officer has clearly stated that from the documents which are available, the allegations made by the complainant i.e. the petitioners have not been established. The question of the State taking a decision on the report would only arise when the allegations are established and any action is warranted on behalf of the State in respect of the persons against whom the allegation has been

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:34715 WP No. 15668 of 2024

HC-KAR

made. When the enquiry though termed as preliminary indicates that the allegations have not been borne out by the documents submitted by the complainant and despite the complainant being called upon to furnish further proof, no such documents have been submitted, it would not be required for the State to take any decision on an Enquiry Report which is clear and categorical that the allegations are not borne out or established.

Hence, no grounds being made out, reserving liberty to the petitioners to agitate any grounds that they may have in appropriate civil proceedings since the issue relates to a Society registered under Karnataka Societies

Registration Act, 1960, the petition stands disposed of.

Sd/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

HA

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36