Mr T R Sridhar Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Mr T R Sridhar Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of as not maintainable, without deciding the challenge to the dismissal order; liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Registrar under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 within 15 days, with benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 if he does so; Registry directed to return certified copies/original documents to the petitioner retaining photocopies; all contentions of the parties kept open; pending applications, if any, disposed of accordingly.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 challenging the petitioner's dismissal from service is maintainable, given the alleged efficacious alternative remedy available to the petitioner under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, which he did not exhaust.

Court's answer

The writ petition is not maintainable: the petitioner having an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, invocation of writ jurisdiction without exhausting that remedy is impermissible, as per the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rikhab Chand Jain (supra).

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the Registrar under Section 70 of the Act of 1959 within a period of 15 days from receipt of a copy of this order.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner approaches the Registrar under Section 70 of the Act of 1959 pursuant to the liberty granted, he is entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 by the petitioner challenging his dismissal from service by respondent No.2 (Managing Director, HOPCOMS) vide order bearing No.HCS/KA.NI.(AA).SHIVI16/232/2022-23 dated 23.06.2022 (Annexure-A) — disposed of as not maintainable: respondent No.2 urged, and the Court accepted, that the petitioner had an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 ('the Act of 1959'), which he failed to exhaust; relying on the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rikhab Chand Jain v. Union of India and Others, Civil Appeal No.6719/2012, disposed of on 12.11.2025, the Court held the writ petition not maintainable — liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Registrar under Section 70 of the Act of 1959 within 15 days, with the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 if he does so — Registry directed to return certified copies/original documents — all contentions kept open; pending applications disposed of (Ashok S. Kinagi, J., Oral Order dated 11.06.2026).

NC: 2026:KHC:28644 WP No. 18955 of 2023

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 18955 OF 2023 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

MR. T.R. SRIDHAR S/O RAMU AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO.16, 7TH A CROSS, HANUMAGIRI NAGAR, CHIKALSANDRA, BENGALURU – 560 061.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. GOVINDARAJU K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA Location: HIGH DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, COURT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.

MANAGING DIRECTOR, HOPCOMS, M.H.MARI GOWDA ROAD,

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:28644 WP No. 18955 of 2023

HC-KAR

(NEAR LALBAGH PARK), LALBAGH, BANGALORE - 560 004.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. G. RAMESH NAIK, AGA FOR R1; SRI. SAI SHAKTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER BEARING NO.HCS/KA.NI.(AA).SHIVI16/232/2022-23 DTD 23.06.2022 ANNEXURE-A, THE FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL PASSED BY THE R2 DISMISSING PETITIONER FROM SERVICE AS NULL AND VOID AND ETC.,

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking for mandamus challenging the order of termination dated 23.06.2022 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-A.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:28644 WP No. 18955 of 2023

HC-KAR

Learned counse l appearing for respondent No.2

submits that the petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable as the petitioner has got an efficacious remedy under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short, ‘the Act of 1959’). The petitioner, without exhausting the efficacious remedy, has filed this writ petition.

3. He has placed reliance on the judgment of the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R IKHAB C HAND J AIN V S . U NION O F I NDIA AND OTHERS reported in C IVIL A PPEAL

N O .6719/2012 disposed off on 12.11.2025.

4. I have perused the judgment passed by the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R IKHAB C HAND J AIN (S UPRA ), held at para No.15, reads thus:

“15. In our considered opinion, the appellant having had a remedy before the High Court in a separate jurisdiction which was equally efficacious,

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:28644 WP No. 18955 of 2023

HC-KAR

he indulged in the (mis)adventure of invoking its writ jurisdiction which was rightly not entertained.”

5. Considering the mandate laid down by the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R IKHAB C HAND J AIN (S UPRA ), the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable.

6. In view of the above discussion, the writ

petition is disposed of .

7. The liberty is reserved to the petitioner to

approach the Registrar under Section 70 of the Act of 1959 within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of

copy of this order. If the petitioner approaches the Registrar, the petitioner is entitled for benefit under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

NC: 2026:KHC:28644 WP No. 18955 of 2023

5 -

HC-KAR

8. The Registry is directed to return the certified

copy/original documents to the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same.

9. All the contentions of the parties are kept open.

10. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed off

accordingly.

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

SSB