Karnataka High Court
K Shivanna vs State Of Karnataka on 28 November, 2025
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:50374
WP No. 33814 of 2025
C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE R
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 33814 OF 2025 (GM-KSR)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 33855 OF 2025 (GM-KSR)
IN W.P.NO.33814/2025
BETWEEN
1. K SHIVANNA
S/O KARIAPPA @ VEERABHADREGOWDA
AGE 60 YEARS
PRESIDENT
KEB ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION (R)
(REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA
SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT )
SILVER JUBILEE BUILDING
NO.28, RACE COURSE CROSS ROAD
A R CIRCLE, BENGALURU 560 009
R/O NO. 162, 5TH MAIN
II STAGE, II PHASE
Digitally signed
by SHWETHA WEST OF CHORD ROAD
RAGHAVENDRA MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
Location: HIGH BENGALURU 560 086
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. SANTHOSH R M
S/O MAYANNA R
AGE: 44 YEARS
SECRETARY
3. JAGADEESH H.R.,
S/O. RAMEGOWDA
SECRETARY FINANCE,
4. KRISHNA,
S/O.LATE THIMMEGOWDA,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:50374
WP No. 33814 of 2025
C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025
HC-KAR
AGE 63 YEARS,
VICE-PRESIDENT,
5. VENKATESHWARA K.N.,
S/O. NURIYA NAIK
AGE: 45 YEARS
ORGANISER SECRETARY,
6. HRIDYA C.R.,
D/O. C.S. RAJASHEKAR
AGE: 39 YEARS
ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
7. ANANDA A.D.,
S/O. DODDAEREGOWDA
AGE: 35 YEARS
ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
8. BASAVARAJU H
S/O. BASAVEGOWDA,
AGE 46 YEARS,
SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT,
9. SMT. ASHA M.,
W/O. MANJUNATH
AGE: 38 YEARS
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FINANCE,
10 . SRI DANAREDDY K.,
S/O. VENKATAREDDY. K
AGE: 47 YEARS
CENTRAL EXECUTIVE MEMBER,
11 . R.V. GANESH,
S/O. B.R. VENKATESHAPPA
AGE: 46 YEARS
VICE-PRESIDENT,
PETITIONERS 2-11 ARE REMAINING
OFFICE BEARERS OF
KEB ENGINEERS' ASSOCIATION, (R)
(REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES
REGISTRATION ACT)
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:50374
WP No. 33814 of 2025
C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025
HC-KAR
SILVER JUBILEE BUILDING,,
NO.28, RACE COURSE CROSS ROAD,
A.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009.
BY SECRETARY.
12 . KEB ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION, (R)
(REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES
REGISTRATION ACT)
SILVER JUBILEE BUILDILNG,
NO.28, RACE COURSE CROSS ROAD,
A.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009
BY ITS SECRETARY.
.... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL., SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHIVARAMU H.C., ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560001
2. DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES &
DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES,
4TH ZONE, BENGALURU CITY,
SAHAKARA SOUDHA, 3RD CROSS, 3RD MAIN,
8TH CROSS ROAD, MALLESHWARAM,
BENGALURU-03
3. ADMINISTRATOR,
KEB ENGINEERS' ASSOCIATION, (R)
(REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES
REGISTRATION ACT)
SILVER JUBILEE BUILDING,
NO.28, RACE COURSE CROSS ROAD,
A.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009.
4. RETURNING OFFICER,
KEB ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION(R).
(REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:50374
WP No. 33814 of 2025
C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025
HC-KAR
REGISTRATION ACT)
SILVER JUBILEE BUILDING,
NO.28, RACE COURSE CROSS ROAD,
A.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009.
.... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.T. BANUPRAKASH., AAG A/W SRI. B. RAVINDRANATH., AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR., SR. ADVOCATE FOR SMT. M.L. SUVARNA., ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DT: 08-10-2025 BEARING NO. DRB-4/SOR-02/23/2025-26 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 MARKED AS ANNEXURE 'C' AND THE ORDER DT: 03-11-2025 BEARING NO. CO 297 CSR 2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 MARKED AS ANNEXURE "G" AND THE LETTER DT: 4-11-2025 BEARING NO.-NIL- ISSUED BY THIRD RESPONDENT MARKED AS ANNEXURE 'H" AND THE CALENDAR OF EVENTS DT: 05- 11-2025 BEARING NO. -NIL- ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 MARKED AS ANNEXURE 'J" BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND ETC.
IN W.P.NO.33855/2025 BETWEEN
1. CHANDRANAYAR G S/O. LATE GOVINDANAYAR, AGE 71 YEARS RETIRED SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, KPTCL, R/O. B2, HOME TECH ICON, 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN, S.G. PALYA, C.V. RAMAN NAGAR, BENGALURU-560093.
2. M. SHANMUKH, S/O. MALLESHAPPA, AGE 75 YEARS, RETIRED EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KPTCL, R/O. NO.21, 2ND STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, NAGARBHAVI, BENGALURU-560072 .... PETITIONERS -5- NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR (BY SRI. MAHESH R. UPPIN., ADVOCATE) AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001
2. DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES & DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, 4TH ZONE, BENGALURU CITY, SAHAKARA SOUDHA, 3RD CROSS, 3RD MAIN, 8TH CROSS ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-03
3. ADMINISTRATOR, KEB ENGINEERS' ASSOCIATION, (R) (REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT) SILVER JUBILEE BUILDING, NO.28, RACE COURSE CROSS ROAD, A.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009.
4. RETURNING OFFICER, KEB ENGINEERS' ASSOCIATION(R). (REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT) SILVER JUBILEE BUILDING, NO.28, RACE COURSE CROSS ROAD, A.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009.
5. KEB ENGINEERS' ASSOCIATION(R).
(REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT) SILVER JUBILEE BUILDING, NO.28, RACE COURSE CROSS ROAD, A.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009. BY ITS SECRETARY .... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.T. BANUPRAKASH., AAG A/W SRI. B. RAVINDRANATH., AGA FOR R1 TO R4; -6-
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR., SR. ADVOCATE FOR SMT. M.L. SUVARNA., ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DT: 08-10-2025 BEARING NO. DRB-4/SOR-02/23/2025-26 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 MARKED AS ANNEXURE 'C' AND THE ORDER DT: 03-11-2025 BEARING NO. CO 297 CSR 2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 MARKED AS ANNEXURE "G" AND THE LETTER DT: 4-11-2025 BEARING NO.-NIL- ISSUED BY THIRD RESPONDENT MARKED AS ANNEXURE 'H" AND THE CALENDAR OF EVENTS DT: 05- 11-2025 BEARING NO. -NIL- ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 MARKED AS ANNEXURE 'J" BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS AND HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 20.11.2025, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CAV ORDER
1. The Petitioners in W.P.No.33814 are before the Court seeking for the following reliefs:
i. Quash the Order dt: 08-10-2025 bearing No. DRB-
4/SOR-02/23/2025-26 passed by Respondent No.2 marked as ANNEXURE 'C' and the Order dt: 03-11-2025 bearing No. CO 297 CSR 2025 passed by the Respondent No.1 marked as ANNEXURE "G" and the letter dt: 4-11-2025 bearing No.-NIL- issued by third respondent marked as ANNEXURE 'H" and the calendar of events dt: 05-11-2025 bearing No. -NIL- issued by Respondent No.4 marked as ANNEXURE 'J" by issuing a writ in the nature of Certiorari; ii. Hold and declare that the existing Central Executive Committee of Petitioner No.12 is -7- NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR entitled to continue in of office for three financial years i.e., till 31-03-2026 or entitled to continue in office till the newly elected Body comes into power;
iii. Permit the Petitionersto hold election to the petitioner No.12 society within 3 months from today; and iv. Pass such other order as deems fit to grant under the circumstances of the case in the interest of Justice.
2. The Petitioners in W.P.No.33855 are before the Court seeking the following reliefs:
i. Quash the Order dt: 08-10-2025 bearing No. DRB-
4/SOR-02/23/2025-26 passed by Respondent No.2 marked as ANNEXURE 'C' and the Order dt:
03-11-2025 bearing No. CO 297 CSR 2025 passed by the Respondent No.1 marked as ANNEXURE "G" and the letter dt: 4-11-2025 bearing No.-NIL- issued by third respondent marked as ANNEXURE 'H" and the calendar of events dt: 05-11-2025 bearing No. -NIL- issued by Respondent No.4 marked as ANNEXURE 'J" by issuing a writ in the nature of Certiorari; ii. Hold and declare that the existing Central Executive Committee of Respondent No.5 is entitled to continue in of office for three financial years i.e., till 31-03-2026 or entitled to continue in office till the newly elected Body comes into power;
iii. Pass such other order as deems fit to grant under the circumstances of the case in the interest of Justice.
3. The facts in both matters are one and the same, and as such, are detailed hereunder:-8-
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 3.1. M/s.KEB Engineers' Association (R), who is Petitioner No.12 in W.P.No.33814/2025 and Respondent No.5 in W.P.No.33855/2025, is a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the KSRA, 1960' for short) with its area of operation extending to all over Karnataka and in such places, where KEB Engineers Employees operate. Its members are engineers working in the Karnataka Electricity Board residing throughout Karnataka State.
The said Society is managed by the office bearers and the Central Executive Committee elected from its members. It consists of a President and 38 members duly elected by the General Body consisting of representation from each of the cadres, i.e., Superintending Engineers, Executive Engineers, Assistant Executive Engineers, Assistant Engineers, two -9- NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR Zonal/Regional representatives duly elected by the respective Zonal/Regional centre, out of which one shall be the Secretary of the Zonal/Regional Centre and members to the Chief Executive Committee ('CEC' for short), 10 members out of which 6 members are retired engineers.
3.2. The elections to the Chief Executive Committee, Zonal Executive Committee, Regional Executive Committee and Divisional Executive Committee are required to be held once in three years to elect new committees and office bearers in accordance with the provisions of Bye-laws 10 and 11 of the Society. 3.3. The election to the existing CEC was held on 12.10.2022, where the requisite number of office bearers had been elected. One Sri. Sudhakar Reddy T.N., was the General Secretary of the Society, not cooperating with
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR the remaining office bearers in the functioning of the Society. In the meeting held on 29.05.2025, he was removed from the said post, which was confirmed by the General Body in its meeting held on 10.10.2025. 3.4. Some of the members of the Society who lost in the election tried to start a parallel association in the name of 'Karnataka Power Engineers' Academy'. It is alleged that Sri. Shivaprakash and Sri.Sudhakar Reddy T.N., who had been removed from the post of General Secretary, had misappropriated the funds of the Society to the tune of Rs.83 lakhs.
3.5. It is alleged that with an intention to avoid taking of any action, the disgruntled members of the Society filed a complaint before Respondent No.2-District Registrar of Societies and Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies ('DRCS' for short), stating that the term of the
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR present Body would come to an end on 11.10.2025 and no action had been taken for conducting of election.
3.6. It is on that basis that Respondent No.2-DRCS had issued a notice on 10.09.2025 to the Petitioners, which was replied to by the Petitioners on 03.10.2025, explaining the delay caused by not taking steps to hold the next election. The said reasons allegedly not being considered by the DRCS, he passed an order on 08.10.2025 directing the Petitioners to take steps for publishing a calendar of events within seven days and for holding an election within 30 days and restricted the members of CEC from spending money of the Society on items other than statutory expenses, daily expenses and election expenses.
3.7. The Petitioners stated that they have conducted a meeting of the CEC on 17.10.2025 when
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR steps were taken to hold election and to appointment of Returning Officer and it was resolved that the voters list would be prepared by issuing notices and publishing draft voters list on 16.11.2025, final voters list on 16.12.2025 and hold election on 05.01.2026 by appointing Smt.H.V. Sandhya, a retired Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies as a Returning Officer. This came to be informed by the Petitioners to the DRCS vide letter dated 17.10.2025. The DRCS is stated to have sent a proposal on 28.10.2025 to the Government to appoint an Administrator. The Government vide order dated 03.11.2025 appointed an Administrator who assumed charge on 04.11.2025 and appointed Respondent No.4 as a Returning Officer, alleging that the said Returning Officer had issued a calendar of events dated 05.11.2025 to hold elections on
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 29.11.2025 without hearing the Petitioners, which is in violation of the principles of natural Justice. The term of the current CEC continues to be in place and would continue till the end of 31.03.2026, being the financial year, the Petitioners are before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.
4. Sri M.R.Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners in W.P.No.33814/2025 submits that:
4.1. The Petitioners were elected as the office bearers of the Society on 12.10.2022, and in terms of Bye-law 12 of the Society, the term shall be for a period of three years, but they will continue to hold the office till a new Committee is elected in their place. He submits that until the three-year period is completed and/or a new Committee is elected, the
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR existing Committee will continue to function, and no elections can be held.
4.2. His submission is that the term 'year' has been defined under Clause (f) of Section 2 of the KSRA, 1960, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
"2. Definitions.- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,--
(a) xxx..
(b) xxx..
(c) xxx..
(d) xxx...
(f) 'year' means the year ending on the 31st day of December or in the case of any society or class of societies the accounts of which are made up to any other date with the previous sanction of the Registrar, the year ending with such date."
4.3. By referring to Clause (f) of Section 2 of KSRA, 1960, he submits that the term 'year' means the year ending on 31st December or, in the case of any Society or class of Societies the accounts of which are made up by any other date with the previous sanction of the
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR Registrar, the year ending with such date. On that basis, he submits that the term of three years of CEC can only end on 31st day of December since the accounts are to be fifinalisedy the end of the financial year, i.e., 31st March of every year.
4.4. By relying on Bye-law 6 of the Society, he submits that the year of the Association being the financial year, the term of the CEC shall continue until 31.03.2026 and would not end with the expiry of three years from the date of election.
4.5. His submission is that when year has been categorically defined in Clause (f) of Section 2 of KSRA, 1960 and bye-law 6 of the Society refers to the financial year, both of them read in conjunction can only result in a situation where the term of the existing Committee would have to continue till 31.03.2026 and any
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR interpretation otherwise would militate against the bye-laws and the Act. The bye-law, which is a contract between the members and the statute, namely KSRA, 1960.
4.6. The complaint having been filed by disgruntled members prior to 31.03.2026, no notice could have been issued by the DRCS on 10.09.2025. The Petitioners, having replied to the DRCS on 03.10.2025 seeking a six-month extension to conduct the election, to ensure a smooth transition and to fulfil the current obligation to the members. The said aspect has not been considered by the DRCS. The reasons furnished by the petitioners, namely, that the audit was pending and would have to be completed before a new committee is elected, there were ongoing projects which include completion of the Golden Jubilee building works in Peenya, building construction work in
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR Bidar, Raichur, construction of sports complex, Mangaluru Zonal Center, and completion of construction works in Mysore. If an election is held before the said projects are completed, there would be a disruption in the completion of the projects.
4.7. There are various discrepancies in the voters' list which have been identified, and the same would require review and rectification to ensure a fair and accurate election. The new identity cards and welfare scheme certificates are required to be issued, and until such cards are issued, elections cannot be held, there being various discrepancies in the welfare schemes, and there being a loss of around Rs.83 lakhs by the previous Committee. These needed to be addressed before a new committee takes charge.
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 4.8. Lastly, he submits that, since a census/survey was initiated by the Government of Karnataka, in which the majority of the members were deputed to carry out the enumeration activity, elections could not be held. In that background, a request had been made by the President of the Society seeking an extension of time until 12.04.2026 to enable the completion of the aforesaid and conduct the election smoothly.
4.9. His submission is that when there are so many grounds which have been stated by the Committee, none of these grounds have been considered by the DRCS, Instead, the DRCS, vide its order dated 08.10.2025 at Annexure- C, has mechanically, without application of mind directed the calendar of events to be published within seven days and elections to be held within 30 days thereafter. He submits
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR this is completely impractical inasmuch as the voters' list is required to be finalised, identity cards are required to be issued, and identification of members required to be made, which could not be made within the time prescribed.
4.10. His submission is also that, as soon as the order dated 08.10.2025 was received by the Society, the Society on 17.10.2025 had written to the DRCS stating that there are 6,800 members to the Society. Since the Respondents insist for the election to be held immediately, efforts would be made by the Society to publish the draft voters list by 16.11.2025, the time for filing objections would be granted until 30.11.2025, which shall be considered by 15.12.2025, the final list of voters would be published by 16.12.2025, and elections would be held on 05.01.2026.
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 4.11. By relying on the said letter dated 17.10.2025, his submission is that the Society and its officers bearers have established their bonafides to conduct the elections by 05.01.2026. This undertaking by the Committee/Society has not been considered by DRCS. The DRCS ought to have provided an opportunity to the Petitioners to explain the same; instead of doing so, the DRCS has not considered the submissions made by the petitioners namely, the notices issued by the Society, the appointment of Smt.H.V.Sandhya, a retired Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies as Returning Officer and the steps taken by the Society to update the member contact details etc. and the notices which have been issued to the members. Without considering all these aspects, the State Government has also issued the impugned
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR order bearing No.CO 297 CSR 2025 Bengaluru dated 03.11.2025, appointing an administrator under Section 27A of the KSRA, 1960. This action on part of the DRCS and the State Government is contrary to the applicable law. 4.12. Section 27A (1) of the KSRA is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
"27A. Appointment of Administrator.- Notwithstanding anything in this Act,--
(1)(a) where any society on account of the pendency of litigation or otherwise has not held or is unable to hold the annual general meeting; or
(b) where the term of office of the members of the governing Body of a society has expired and a new governing body has not for any reason been constituted; or
(c) where on a report made by the Registrar or otherwise, on enquiry, the State Government considers it necessary in public interest so to do, the State Government may, by order published in the official Gazette, appoint an Administrator for such Society for such period, not exceeding six months, as may be specified in the order, to manage the affairs of the Society:
Provided that for reasons to be recorded in writing, the State Government may, by like order, [extend either prospectively or retrospectively, the said period] 1 by any further
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR periods not exceeding six months at a time, so however subject to the provisions of clause (5), the aggregate period shall not extend beyond 2 [four years];
4.13. By relying on Section 27A (1) of the KSRA, 1960, he submits that an appointment of an Administrator can be made only after conducting an enquiry on the report received from the Registrar, which enquiry has to be held in terms of Section 25 of the KSRA, 1960, without an enquiry being held, no Administrator could be appointed. This distinguishes from the methodology of appointment of an Administrator under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, (hereinafter referred to as 'the KCSA, 1959' for short), more particularly, Section 28A (5) thereof, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
"28A. Management of co-operative societies vest in the *board*.-
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR (1) ...
(5) If the new *board* is not constituted under section 29A, on the date of expiry of the 1 [term of office of the *board* or if the elections are not held within the time limits specified in Section 39A,] 1 the Registrar or any other officer within whose jurisdiction the Society is situated, and who is auauthorisedy the Registrar, shall be deemed to have assumed charge as Administrator and he shall, for all purposes function as such *board* of management. The Administrator shall, subject to the control of the Registrar, exercise all the powers and perform all the functions of the *board* of the co-operative Society or any office bearer of the co-
operative Society and take all such actions as may be required, in the interest of the cooperative Society. 1. Substituted by Act 6 of 2010 w.e.f.03.11.2009.
[Provided that the Registrar shall appoint an administrator to a Co-operative Society or each of the co-operative Societies formed after amalgamation or rereorganisationr division in accordance with section 14 for a period of three months and the Administrator so appointed shall arrange for holding elections to a *board* of such Co-operative Society or Societies as the case may be] 1 1. Inserted by Act 13 of 2004 w.e.f. 22.03.2004.
4.14. By referring to Sub-Section (5) of Section 28A of KCSA, 1959, he submits that under the scheme of KCSA, 1959, if a new Board is not constituted under Section 29A as on the date
- 24 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR of expiry of the term of 'office' of the Board or if the election is not held within time limit specified under Section 29A of KCSA, 1959, the Registrar or any other officer within whose jurisdiction the Society is situated and who is authorised by the Registrar shall be deemed to have assumed charge as an Administrator and he shall for all the purposes function as such Board of Management.
4.15. His submission is that Section 27A of the KSRA, 1960, when juxtaposed to Sub-Section(5) Section 28A of the KCSA, 1959, there is a deemed appointment of an Administrator, if the term of the 'Board' is expired whereas under Section 27A of the KSRA, 1960, an enquiry has to be conducted by the State Government and thereafter, an Administrator has to be appointed. Thus, he submits that without an enquiry being conducted, the
- 25 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR impugned order dated 03.11.2025 having been passed, the same is required to be quashed by this Court and the Society be allowed to hold elections in the manner as undertaken by the Society.
4.16. He relies upon the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Guddalli Vs. Registrar of Co-operative Societies1, more particularly, paras 13 and 14 thereof, which are reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
"13. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Decision of the Division Bench in Rangaiah's case (supra), has wrongly assumed that Explanation to Section 28A(3) is also applicable to sub-section (4) thereof. It was contended that the Legislature has used the term "co-operative year" in sub-section (3) while it has not repeated the said term while enacting sub-section (4) and on the contrary has used the phrase "every year" which would clearly show a different legislative intention for governing the term of elected office bearers of the Society as contra-distinguished from the term of the Managing Committee itself. In this connection, your attention was also invited to another Decision of the Division Bench of this Court in H.N.RAMESH vs PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE & RURAL 1 ILR 1993 KAR 2367
- 26 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. to show that during the extended term of the Managing Committee election of office-bearers has to be held. This election of office-bearers is not necessarily connected with the original term of Managing Committee as prescribed by sub-section (3) of Section 28A of the Act. Reliance was placed on the Decision of the Supreme Court in THE MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE vs ARTHUR PAUL BENTHALL, and in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI vs M/S EAST WEST IMPORT & EXPORT (P) LTD., for submitting that when two words of different import are used in the statute, they must be given their separate meanings. Placing reliance on the decision in the case of UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER vs DEOKI NANDAN AGARWALS, it was contended that the Court cannot legislate if the words in the statute are clear. That when the term "year" is used in sub- section (4), it cannot be read as "co-operative year", which has a different connotation. It was, therefore, submitted that on a conjoint reading of sub-section (3) and sub-section (4) of Section 28A of the Act, it should be held that the election for the office bearers of the Society should be held from amongst the members of the Managing Committee every year and that the term 'year' being not defined by the, Act should have the same meaning as is given by Section 3(43) of the Karnataka General Clauses Act, 1899 that is, year reckoned according to the British Calendar. That the Judgment of the Division Bench in ILR 1992(4) KAR 3784 (supra), must be held to be not laying down good law. The learned Counsel for the 3rd respondent, on the other hand, submitted that the word 'co-operative year' is directly connected with the working of the co-operative societies under the Act, and that Explanation to sub-section (3) of Section 28A is for the purpose of the entire Section 28A, which would include sub-section (4) thereof. It
- 27 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR was also contended that sub-section (4) of Section 28A does not control the term of the office bearers at all. All that it has enjoined is that members of the Committee shall elect every year the office bearers from among themselves. Mr S.R.Nayak, learned Government Advocate, also supported the contentions of the contesting respondents and submitted that life of the Managing Committee itself is circumscribed by three co-operative years, as indicated in sub-section (3) of Section 28A of the Act. If that is so, the office bearers who are to be elected from amongst the Managing Committee members, cannot have for their term a different yardstick of twelve calendar months as contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant. That the term "co-operative year" is defined artificially in the Act, and that would govern the terms of various committees of the co-operative societies. That the term of the office bearers cannot be beyond that of the Committee.
14. Having given our anxious consideration to the rival contentions, we find that in the light of clear language of sub-section (4) of Section 28A, it is not possible to accept the contentions of the learned Counsel for the respondents that the term 'year' as employed by sub-section (4) must have the same meaning as the term 'co-operative year' employed by sub-section (3). When the Legislature in one of the sub-sections used the term 'co-operative year' for denoting the term of the Managing Committee and advisedly used the term "every year" in sub- section (4) while dealing with the election of office bearers of the Society to be elected from amongst the members of the Managing Committee, it becomes obvious that the term of the office bearers was linked up with actual year and not with a co- operative year. It is true that Explanation to sub-
- 28 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR section (3) starts by saying that it is for the purpose of the Section. But the remaining part of the Explanation clearly indicates the limited field on which it operates, namely, for the purpose of computing the term of the office of the Committee and it cannot be projected any further by any process of interpretation, as that would amount to legislating on the topic. It is also to be kept in view that the term 'year' is not defined by the Act, and hence we can certainly fall back upon the provisions of the Karnataka General Clauses Act. Section 3(43) of that Act, defines the term 'year' to mean, year reckoned according to the British calendar. That means, 12 months computed according to British calendar. There is nothing in the Act, which makes this meaning of the term 'year' repugnant to the context for delimiting the term of the elected office bearers. This result also flows from the express language of sub-section (3) and sub-section (4) of Section 28A of the Act. Reconciling the two provisions, it becomes obvious that once a Managing Committee has been elected, its life will be three co-operative years only. But within that span of life the Managing Committee every year is called upon by sub-section (4) of Section 28A of the Act, to elect the office bearers including the President from amongst its members. It is of course true that while undertaking such yearly exercise for election of office bearers from amongst its members, the Managing Committee may find that the last Body of the elected office-bearers may not get the full span of twelve months life as the Managing Committee's own term may come to an end by the end of the third co-operative year. But that would happen not because of sub-section (4) of Section 28A of the Act, but because of the fact that parent body itself ceases to exist at the end of the third co-operative year, taking with it the office bears elected from amongst its own members who
- 29 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR have to vacate their offices as Managing Committee members at the end of the third co-operative year. Reliance placed by the learned Counsel for the respondent on Section 29A of the Act, also is of no avail as that refers to the commencement of the term of the office of the Managing Committee. That has nothing to do with the term of office of the elected office bearers from amongst the members of the Managing Committee as laid down by sub- section (4) of Section 28A. The learned Counsel for the respondent No.3 had also placed strong reliance on Section 63, especially sub-section (4A) thereof. Even this provision is of no avail to the respondents for resolving the present controversy for the simple reason that for audit, inquiry, inspection and surcharge, accounts have to be made up for each co-operative year and therefore, the statement showing the receipts and disbursements, profit and loss and the balance sheet etc., would naturally refer to that co-operative year. The term 'year' as employed in the latter part of sub-section (4A) of Section 63 must necessarily take colour from the term 'each co-operative year' as employed in the beginning of that sub-section. Such is not the case with sub-section (4) of Section 28A which covers entirely a different field independent of the field covered by sub-section (3) of Section 28A. Reliance placed on Section 27 of the Act, is also of no avail for deciding the present question as all that it mandates is that annual general meeting of a co- operative society has to be held once in a year. That year has nothing to do with the term of the office bearers of a co-operative society that are to be elected as per Section 28A(4). A faint attempt was also made by the learned Counsel for respondent No.3 to rely upon the bye-laws of the Society to indicate a different intention. But it is well settled that bye-laws cannot cut across the mandatory scope of the Section. Hence, this
- 30 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR attempt was also a futile attempt. To recapitulate, sub-section (4) of Section 28A enjoins the members of the Managing Committee to elect from amongst themselves, the officers of the co-operative Society every year. It thus implicitly prescribes the term of the earlier elected Body of office bearers to be one year, while sub-section (3) of Section 28A deals with the term of office of the Managing Committee itself, which is laid down to be three co-operative years. Thus both these provisions deal with different topics and are enacted for catering to the requirement of different facts situations. It is true that sub-section (4) of Section 28A nowhere expressly provides for term of the officers of the co- operative Society, who are elected from amongst the members of the Managing Committee. But it is clear that the fresh elections to the office bearers of the Society have to be held after the term of the earlier elected Body of office bearers expires. We may, in this connection, usefully refer to the Decision of the Division Bench of this Court in H.N.Ramesh vs Primary Co-operative Agriculture & Rural Development Bank Ltd (supra), wherein the Division Bench consisting of RAMA JOIS, J, (as he then was) and MIRDHE, J., speaking through RAMA JOIS, J., observed in para-5 of the said decision, in connection with sub-section (4) of Section 28A, as under:
"(4) The members of the Committee shall, every year, elect from among themselves the officers of the co-operative Society. The election for the office bearers shall be by ballot.
The above sub-section requires that the members of the Committee elected at a General Body Meeting shall every year elect from among themselves the officers of the co-operative Society. There is no doubt that the bye-laws of the Society with which we are concerned provide for an election of a
- 31 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR President and Vice President. Therefore, under sub- section (4) of Section 28A of the Act, it is obligatory for the Board/Committee of Management to elect the President and Vice President every year. From this, it follows the terms of office of President and Vice President, is one year."
We wholly concur with this observation." 4.17. By relying on Guddalli's case, he submits that though the said decision was with reference to KCSA, 1959, the Full Bench has dealt with the definition of 'year' and has come to a conclusion that the 'year' would have to be reckoned according to the British calendar, which is 12 months, which would end on 31st December 2025. He submits without prejudice to his contention that under Bye-law 6 of the Society, insofar as the Society is concerned, is a financial year which would end on 31st March 2026. Thus, either as a calendar year or as a financial year, the term of the Committee has not come to an end as on date. The contention of the Respondents that the term has come to
- 32 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR an end on 12.10.2025 is completely misconceived, the Petitioners, the elected managed Committee is required to be permitted to discharge its duties during the term for which it was elected, i.e., until 31.03.2026 or until a new Committee is elected, an Administrator could not have been appointed under Section 27A of the KSRA 1960.
4.18. He relies upon the decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of R.Mallikarjunaiah and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and others2 , more particularly, paras 3, 5, 6 and 8 thereof, which are reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
"3. Petitioners have contended that Act does not mandate that an association or Society registered under the Act is to be renewed and it only mandates that such Society registered under the Act is required to furnish balance sheet, statement of audited account of income and expenditure and 2 2015 SCC Online Kar 9438: (2016) 2 Kant LJ 508
- 33 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR also list of members of governing Body after every annual general meeting and 4th respondent- Association has been filing aforestated documents before 3rd respondent immediately after every annual general meeting and as such impugned order holding that Society had not been renewed is without any statutory force and in view of same Administrator cannot be appointed on that ground.
5. 3rd respondent has filed statement of objections supporting the impugned order and contending inter alia that Petitionershave no locus standi to file the writ petitions and on account of complaint received against 4th respondent- Association that it had committed serious acts of omission and commission, an enquiry came to be initiated and it was found in enquiry there has been non-compliance of mandatory provisions of the Act viz., Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Act and as such there was no need for issuing any notice to the 4th respondent-Association or to any other persons prior to appointment of Administrator. It is contended that subsequent to enquiry report submitted by Enquiry Officer as per Annexure-G, 3rd respondent-District Registrar of Societies forwarded the report to 1st respondent and recommended for appointing an Administrator by communication dated 29-1-2015-Annexure-H and as such 1st respondent in exercise of power vested under Section 27-A of the Act has appointed an Administrator to 4th respondent- Association for a period of six months and there is no infirmity in the said order whatsoever. Hence, respondents have prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions.
6. Perusal of the records would indicate that Petitioners1 and 2 are the Joint Secretaries of 4th respondent-Association and 3rd petitioner is a
- 34 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR member of 4th respondent-Association and he is also Vice-President of Kho Kho Federation of India which is the parent body of 4th respondent- Association. 5th respondent herein is said to have filed a complaint before 3rd respondent alleging certain irregularities in the working of 4th respondent-Association as per Annexure-D. Based on said complaint third respondent initiated enquiry and issued notice to 4th respondent- Association. The Headquarters Assistant, Office of the District Registrar, Gandhinagar, Bengaluru had been appointed as Enquiry Officer to enquire into the allegations made by complainant. 3rd respondent issued notice on 28-12-2011 to 4th respondent-Association. During the course of enquiry 2nd petitioner has appeared on behalf of 4th respondent-Association and has filed the copies of balance sheet, statement of audited accounts of income and expenditure of asAssociationnd also the list of members of governing Body as was filed before 3rd respondent from 1975-2010 vide Annexure-F. Enquiry Officer on perusal of records has submitted a report on 21-6-2014 Annexure-G. Said Enquiry Officer who conducted enquiry into the allegations made in the complaint has arrived at a conclusion that allegations made against 4th respondent-Association of not having submitted the records is not proved by complainant; it is also held that complainant was fully aware of the audited balance sheet, income and expenditure accounts of 4th respondent-Association for the past 15 years and as such held there was no material to establish that there has been any infraction in conducting the affairs of 4th respondent-Association. Despite such finding having been arrived at by Enquiry Officer, he has opined that 4th respondent namely asAssociationnd its office-bearers have not been
- 35 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR able to establish or prove that the contents of complaint is false and he has further opined that there is no material to show that as Association which was registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act as having been renewed from time to time the delegate of 3rd respondent has neither enquired into the requirement of annual renewal of 4th respondent-Association nor he has called upon 4th respondent to offer its explanation if any for its non-renewal every year. Said report having been forwarded by 3rd respondent to 1st respondent, 1st respondent has intimated 2nd respondent to tender its opinion as to whether a Administrator has to be appointed to 4th respondent-Association and called upon the 2nd respondent to submit a report in this regard by communication dated 24-2-2015 Annexure-J. On account of alleged report submitted by 2nd respondent on 2-3-2015 to 1st respondent impugned order dated 29-4-2015 Annexure-A appointing Administrator to 4th respondent- Association came to be passed by 1st respondent. It requires to be noticed at this juncture itself that enquiry came to be conducted by delegate of 3rd respondent was based on a complaint given by 5th respondent and based on said enquiry conducted in exercise of power vested under Section 25 of Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 report dated 21-6-2014 Annexure-G came to be submitted by the Enquiry Officer, who has clearly opined that contents of complaint is far from truth. In other words he has concluded that documents produced by the 4th respondent- Association would clearly establish that there is no merit in the allegations made by 5th respondent against 4th respondent-Association. It has been recorded by Enquiry Officer in his report to the following effect:
- 36 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR " ಾ ಗಳ ಮತು ಪ ಾ ಗಳ ಾರ ೆಯ ನಂತರ ಗಂ ೕರ ಸ ರೂಪದ ೆಲವ ಅಂಶಗಳ ಕಂಡುಬಂ ರುವ ದು ಈ ೆಳಕಂಡಂ'ೆ ಇರುತ)ೆ:
(1) ಪ ಾ ಗಳ *ಾ ರಂಭ ಂದ ತಹ-ವ/ೆ 0ೆ ಸ123ರತಕ4ಂತಹ )ಾಖ6ೆಗ70ೆ ಸುಳ 8 ಎಂದು :ರೂ;ಸುವ ಬ0ೆ< =ಾಗೂ >ಾತ?ಪ@ಸುವ ಬ0ೆ< ಾ ಗಳ Aಾವ )ೇ :ಜ ಎಂಬು)ಾC ಸDEFಕ?ಸುವ )ಾಖ6ೆಗಳನುG ಸ123ರುವ ಲ2.
(2) ಾ ಗಳH ಕೂಡ ಸುIಾರು 15 ವಷK ಂದ ಈ ದೂರು :ೕ@ರುವ Lಂ ನ Mಾಂಕದವ/ೆಗೂ ಕೂಡ ಸಂಘದ12 ಇವರೂ ಕೂಡ ಒಬP ಸದಸQ/ಾCದುR, ಅ12 ನSೆಯುವ ಖಚುK ೆಚU, ಾEKಕ 6ೆಕ4ಪತ ಅನುVೕದMೆಯ ಬ0ೆ< ಅವ?0ೆ ಅ? ತು.
(3) ಪ ಾ ಗಳ ಸಂಘದ MೋಂದW ಾX)ೆ, 1960ರ ?ೕ'ಾQ ಕ ಮ ಜರುCಸುವಂ'ೆ =ೇ7 ೆ :ೕ@ರುವ ದು =ೊರತುಪ@3 ¨ÉÃgÁåªÀ ಸಂಘದವರು ಸ123ರುವ )ಾಖ6ೆಗYೇ ಸುಳ 8 ಎಂದು =ೇಳ ವ Aಾವ )ೇ ¸Àà¹ÖÃಕ ಸತಕ ಂತಹ )ಾಖ6ೆಗಳನುG ಸ123ರುವ ಲ2."
8. Undisputedly 1st respondent has exercised power under Section 27-A of the Act to appoint an Administrator to 4th respondent-Association based on the report of Enquiry Officer dated 21-6-2014 Annexure-G. When said report itself does not even remotely suggest that contents of complaint has been proved or in other words complaint itself being meritless 3rd respondent could not have jumped to a conclusion that Association (4th respondent) had not obtained renewal of its registration without any material available before it. As such based on said report 1st respondent could not have passed impugned order, that too without complying with principles of natural Justice. After receipt of report, Annexure-G from Enquiry Officer through 3rd respondent, 1st respondent ought to have extended an opportunity to 4th respondent-Association to reply to said report and only after hearing 4th
- 37 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR respondent or its office-bearers or its authorised representative, 1st respondent could have taken steps to pass impugned order." 4.19. By referring to R.Mallikarjunaiah's case, his submission is that when a report of the Registrar is submitted, an enquiry is required to be conducted under Section 25 of the KSRA, 1960. No such enquiry having been conducted, an Administrator under Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, could not be appointed. On the above basis, he submits that W.P.No.33814/2025 is required to be allowed and the relief sought to be granted.
5. Sri Mahesh R. Uppin, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners in W.P.No.33855/2025 submits that:
5.1. He adopts the arguments of Sri M.R.Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners in W.P.No.33814/2025.
- 38 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 5.2. He reiterates that he does not ascribe to the definition of calendar 'year' but contends that the term would end on the financial year after finalisation of accounts on 31.03.2026 and no Administrator could be appointed until 31.03.2026.
5.3. He also reiterates that without an enquiry under Section 25 of KSRA, 1960, no Administrator could be appointed under Section 27A of KSRA, 1960.
5.4. His further submission is that the entire action having been initiated, at the behest of disgruntled members, this Court ought to take notice of the said fact and quash the appointment of an Administrator permitting the executive members of Board of Management to conduct the election.
- 39 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR
6. Sri.V.G.Bhanu Prakash, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State in both the matters, would submit that:
6.1. The contentions of the Petitioners are completely misconceived, inasmuch as, the appointment of an Administrator has been made under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, on account of the term of the 'office' of the members of the governing Body of a Society having been expired and a new governing body has not been constituted.
6.2. Insofar as exercise of powers under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, he submits that no enquiry is required to be held, it is only when a report is made by the Registrar. On enquiry, if the State Government considers it necessary in public interest to do so where a report has been
- 40 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR made by Registrar or otherwise, if the State Government were to excise powers under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, then would an enquiry under Section 25 of the KSRA, 1960 be required, those could be for any other reasons including misappropriation, maladministration or the like. When powers under Clause (b) of Sub- Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, there is no requirement for any enquiry to be held.
6.3. Insofar as the term of 'office' of the Committee is concerned, by referring to the reply of the Petitioners dated 03.10.2025, he submits that the Petitioners themselves accepted that the term for the current executive Committee was slated to expire on 12.10.2025 and a request was made for a six months extension. The said fact of expiry of the term was reiterated in the
- 41 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR letter of the Managing Committee dated 17.10.2025. Hence, the contention now urged that the term would have to be considered with reference to the year, namely the British calendar year ending on 31.12.2025 or by referring Bye-law 6 of the Society that the financial year would end on 31.03.2026 is completely misconceived and is an afterthought.
6.4. His submission is that once a managing Committee has been elected for a fixed term of three years, the said period of the Committee would have to be calculated from the date on which the election took place and not any other date.
6.5. On the above basis, he submits that the term of the Committee which was elected and took office on 12.10.2022 expired on 12.10.2025, no new Committee having been constituted
- 42 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR exercising powers under Clause (b) of Sub- Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, the order dated 03.11.2025 has been passed appointing an Administrator. The existing Committee cannot insist that it will hold the election to the Society after its term expires; the existing Committee loses its standing after the expiry of the term, which occurred on 12.10.2025. On that basis, he submits that a calendar of events having already been issued in terms of Annexure-J produced along with the petitions, the list of eligible voters having already been finalised, the elections now being proposed to be held on 29.11.2025, this Court ought not to interfere with the election process which have already commenced and ought to permit the election to be completed. If the Petitioners have any grievance as regards the election to be held, they could always approach
- 43 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR the appropriate forum seeking an appropriate relief.
7. Sri D.R.Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel, who appears for the intervener, being certain other members of the Society, submits that:
7.1. He reiterates the arguments of the learned Additional Advocate General and submits that if the contention of the Petitioners were to be accepted, then irrespective of the date of which the election were to be held, the term would come to an end either at the end of the calendar year on 31st December of that year or the ending of the financial year. He gives an example by stating that if the term were to come to an end on 15.04.2025, the interpretation of the Petitioners were to be accepted, the term would stand extended till 31.12.2025, if the calendar year is taken into account or 31.3.2026, the financial year were
- 44 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR to be taken into account, thus providing one extra year to the Committee to function, which is not what is envisaged.
7.2. His submission is also that the Committee, having been elected and come into being on 12.10.2022, the said term expired on 11.10.2025 and there can be no extension of the term by referring to an artificial definition of the calendar year or financial year. 7.3. Insofar as bye-law 12 of the Society is concerned, he submits that the Society, having been registered nearly 60 years ago, the said Bye-law was one which was agreed upon between the members before the introduction of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960 by way of an amendment in the year, 1976. Thus, the bye- law cannot override the statute and extend the term of the elected Committee.
- 45 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 7.4. On the above basis, he submits that the writ petitions are required to be dismissed and the election process be required to continue.
8. Heard Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners in W.P.No.33814/2025, Sri Mahesh R. Uppin, learned Counsel for the Petitioners in W.P.No.33855/2025, Sri.V.G.Bhanuprakash, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri D.R.Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel for for the intervenor in both the matters.
9. The points that would arise for consideration are:
1) In a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, whether the term of 'office' of the elected Committee would end on the expiry of the term mentioned in the bye-
laws or would it stand extended by referring to the definition of 'year' under Clause (f) of Section 2 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 to be a calendar year ending on 31st December, of that year or by reference to any bye-law of the Society where the financial year ends on 31st March of that year, or would the Committee continue to be in office until new Committee is elected?
- 46 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR
2) Whether, while exercising powers under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, the principles of natural Justice have to be followed, providing an opportunity for the existing Committee to be heard before an order of appointing an Administrator is passed?
3) Whether, while exercising powers under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, an enquiry under Section 25 of the KSRA Act, 1960, is required to be conducted before the exercise of such power.
4) In the present case, is the appointment of an Administrator proper and correct, or does it require any interference of this Court?
5) What order?
10. I answer the above points as under;
11. ANSWER TO POINT NO.1: In a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, whether the term of 'office' of the elected Committee would end on the expiry of the term mentioned in the bye- laws or would it stand extended by referring to the definition of 'year' under Clause (f) of Section 2 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 to be a calendar year ending on 31st December, of that year or by reference to any bye-law of the Society where the financial year ends on 31st March of that year, or would the Committee continue to be in office until new Committee is elected?
- 47 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 11.1. The submission of Sri. M.R. Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners firstly, is that the accounts of the Society being finalised on 31st March of every year for the purpose of calculation of the year, it is this 31st March, which needs to be taken into consideration, on that basis the contention is that if the term were to expire before 31st March, it will stand extended until 31st March. 11.2. In the alternative, his submission is that in terms of Clause (f) of Section 2 of the KSRA, 1960, the year would end on 31st day of December, on that basis the contention is that if the term were to expire before 31st December, it will stand extended until 31st December.
11.3. Lastly, he submits that in terms of by-law 12, the term of the office of the Managing
- 48 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR Committee is for a period of three years, and the Committee shall hold office till a new Committee is elected. On that basis, his submission is that, the election not having been held until election is held and a new Committee takes charge, the present Committee would continue to hold office or in the alternative the financial year ending with 31st March, the Committee shall continue to hold office until 31.03.2026 or in the alternative at the least his contention is that the Committee shall hold office until 31st December, 2025.
11.4. The submissions of Sri. B.G.Bhanuprakash, learned Additional Advocate General and Sri.D.R.Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the impleading applicant, who was allowed to come on records as an intervener, are that the term being a fixed
- 49 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR period of three years when the three years term get over, the term would come to an end and before such term coming to an end election is to be held.
11.5. It is in the context of these two sets of submissions that this Court would have to decide the above issue.
11.6. Reliance having been placed on Clause 12 of the Bye-law of the Society, which is extracted hereunder for easy reference: "12. Term The term of the C.E.C., Z.E.C., R.E.C., and D.E.C., shall be for a period of 3 years, but they will continue to hold the office till new committee is elected in their place."
11.7. A perusal of Clause 12 of Bye-law of Society would indicate as if that the term of the Committee would be till the new Committee is elected and takes charge. However, what is to be considered is that these Bye-laws were
- 50 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR drafted prior to the amendment to the KSRA, 1960, introducing Section 27A. The said Section 27, having been introduced by way of the amendment Act 65 of 1976, which came into force on 02.07.1976, that is to say, Section 27A came to be introduced post the registration of the Society in question. 11.8. The explanatory note regarding Amending Act 65 of 1976 is hereunder reproduced for easy reference:
"Amending Act 65 of 1976:-- When general body meeting is not or cannot be held and a new governing body is not or cannot be elected, the affairs of a society constituted under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 will go into stalemate. Where the Society is, for example one which has been given large Government aid by way of land or cash, or is running big educational institutions, a stalemate in the top management body would cause much hardship or harm to many and would affect public interest very considerably. When such a stalemate arises, there is no remedy in the existing Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960; there is no provision in the Karnataka Societies Registration Act for the appointment of an Administrator to temporarily manage the
- 51 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR affairs of such a Society until a valid election is held and a new governing body takes charge.
It was therefore considered necessary to amend the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 to provide of an administrator in the above mentioned situation. Provision is made in general terms that where any society has not held or is unable to hold the annual general body meeting or where the terms of office has been expired and a new governing body has not been constituted or where the State consider it necessary in public interest so to do, an Administrator may be appointed for a short period. It is further provided that the Administrator should take steps to convene the general body meeting and hold elections for the constitution of the new governing Body before his term expires. In other words the whole thing is a shop-gap arrangement. Hence the Ordinance was promulgated by insertion of new Section 27-A after section 27 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960."
11.9. A perusal of the said note would indicate that the insertion of the said Section was necessitated on account of the fact that, when a General Body Meeting is not or cannot be held, and a new Governing Body is not or
- 52 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR cannot be elected, the affairs of the Society constituted under the Act will go into a stalemate. Thus, the situation which is contemplated was exactly contrary to bye-law 12 of the Society inasmuch as earlier the Society is used to have such a Clause and the governing Board would continue to be in power without holding a meeting, and it is in that background that the legislature in its wisdom, thought it fit to introduce Section 27A and provided for appointment of an Administrator when the term of the 'governing body' had expired and a new governing body had not been elected, providing authority to the Administrator to take steps to convene the General Body Meeting and hold election for the constitution of the new governing Body before his term expires.
- 53 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 11.10. Section 27A has been reproduced herein above. A perusal of Clause (a) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, would indicate that where any Society, on account of pendency of litigation or otherwise, has not held or is unable to hold the Annual General Meeting, an Administrator could be appointed. 11.11. In terms of Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, where the term of office of the members of the governing Body of a Society has expired, and a new governing body is not for any reason being constituted, an Administrator could be appointed. 11.12. In terms of Clause (c) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, where on a report made by the Registrar or otherwise, on enquiry, the State Government considers it necessary in public interest so to do, an Administrator could be appointed.
- 54 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 11.13. The Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, are separated by the disjunctive "or" i.e, in each of the above situations, an Administrator could be appointed, each of them being independent of the other.
11.14. The submission of Sri M.R. Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel, is that, before the appointment of an Administrator, a hearing is required to be provided, inasmuch as the State Government has to consider it necessary in the public interest that an Administrator is required to be appointed.
11.15. He contradistincts this with Clause 5 of Sub-
Section 28A of KCSA, 1959, which has been reproduced herein above and submits that the appointment of an Administrator under the KCSA, 1959 is automatic on the expiry of the term, whereas under Section 27A of the KSRA,
- 55 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 1960, the State Government must pass an order and whenever any order is required to be passed, it would necessarily require principles of natural Justice to be followed. 11.16. I am unable to agree with the said submission of the learned Senior Counsel inasmuch as, as indicated above Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, are disjunctive in nature. Clause (c) of Sub- Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, is not aptly worded inasmuch as Clause (c) consists of two different portions. The first portion being, "where on a report made by the Registrar or otherwise, on enquiry, the State Government considers it necessary in public interest so to do" and the second portion being, "the State Government may, by order published in the official gazette, appoint an Administrator for such Society for such period,
- 56 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR not exceeding six months, as may be specified in the order, to manage the affairs of the Society:".
11.17. The above, in my considered opinion, are two distinct portions, inasmuch as the second portion extracted above would apply to all clauses, i.e., (a), (b) and (c), and not only to Clause (c) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960. In that background, if Clause (c) were to be looked at, then it is only in terms of Clause (c) where a report has been made by the Registrar or otherwise, on enquiry, the State Government considers it necessary in public interest to do so, that is to say, it is only in terms of Clause (c) that the State Government has to consider it necessary to do so. There is no such requirement in Clause (a) and Clause (b) above.
- 57 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 11.18. The second portion, as indicated supra, would be applicable to all three clauses inasmuch as the second portion only deals with, the procedure of the State Government may by order published in the Official Gazette appoint an Administrator for such Society for such period not exceeding six months. Thus, there being no requirement for the State Government to consider it necessary in terms of Clause (a) or Clause (b), in the event of the happening of any of the events contemplated in Clause (a) or Clause (b), an Administrator is required to be appointed. In my considered opinion the same is automatic inasmuch as the explanation which has been extracted herein above indicates that the amendment was required to cater to a mischief where, despite the expiry of the term elections were not held and new governing Body did not take office.
- 58 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR 11.19. If the interpretation of Sri. M.R.Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel, is accepted, then the very purpose of bringing about an amendment to introduce Section 27A would be lost, so also the purpose would be lost if the interpretation of financial year and calendar year as submitted by him were to be accepted. Thus, in terms of Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, where the term of 'office' of the members of the governing Body of a Society has expired and a new governing body has not for any reason being constituted, an administrator would necessarily have to be appointed by the State Government, empowering the Administrator to conduct the election within the term of his appointment. 11.20. The interpretation now sought to be given is also an afterthought inasmuch as in the correspondence which had been exchanged
- 59 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR between the governing Body of the Society and the DRCS as far back on 03.10.2025, the governing Body, the President had clearly stated that the term of the current executive Committee is slated to expire on 12.10.2025 and had sought for an extension of a period of six months. The fact that the President had sought for an extension of six months, which is the subject of the said letter, namely "request for a six-month extension for conducting election.-reg." would categorically establish that even according to the President, the term was to expire on 12.10.2025 and not on 31.12.2025 or 31.03.2026 or until the new Committee were to take over.
11.21. This is again reinforced by the further letter of the President of the Society dated 17.10.2025, when he had again categorically stated that the term had expired on 12.10.2025 but had
- 60 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR indicated that the election process would be commenced from 16.11.2025 and completed by 05.01.2026.
11.22. Thus, on law, facts as also, there being an admission on the part of the President that the term of the governing Body expired on 12.10.2025, the interpretation now sought to be given, and the arguments now sought to be advanced are not sustainable. 11.23. Hence, I answer point No.1 by holding that a Society registered under Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, the term of office of the elected Committee would end on the expiry of the term i.e., the number of years calculated from the date on which, the Committee was elected and took office, there would be no requirement to include or refer to the definition of year under Clause (f) of Section 2 of the KSRA, 1960, to provide for an artificial
- 61 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR definition of a calendar year or nor would there be a requirement for making a reference to the bye-law of the Society to include the definition of financial year. If bye-laws were to have a provision for the term of the governing body to continue until a new governing body is elected, the same cannot be resorted to in view of the statutory requirement under Section 27A which will override any bye-law contrary to the statutory requirement.
12. ANSWER TO POINT NUMBER 2: Whether, while exercising powers under Clause (b) of Sub- Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, the principles of natural Justice have to be followed, providing an opportunity for the existing Committee to be heard before an order of appointing an Administrator is passed? 12.1. Some of the aspects relating to this have been dealt with in answer to point No.1 as indicated supra, the contention of Sri.M.R. Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel is that if an Administrator were required to be appointed
- 62 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR under Section 27A of the KSRA, 1960, notice has to be issued to the existing Committee and the existing Committee has to be heard before an order appointing an Administrator is passed. This he submits for the reason that when a show cause notice had been issued by Respondent No.2, indicating that the elections have to be held before the term expired, the governing body had categorically indicated that there were several works which were remaining to be completed, namely audit was pending, ongoing projects which included completion of the Golden Jubilee building works in Peenya, building construction works in Bidar, Raichur, construction of Sports Complex, Mangaluru Zonal Center, completion of construction works in Mysore were pending, and these facts having mean brought to the notice of the DRCS, the DRCS ought to have
- 63 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR appreciated these aspects provided a hearing to the Managing Committee and extended the term. His submission is that if all the works were not completed before elections were held, then the new Committee would not know what is to be done, and the handover cannot happen properly.
12.2. He relies on the second portion of Clause (c) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, to contend that on enquiry the State Government, if it considers it necessary in public interest to do so, would include an enquiry under Section 25 of the KSRA, 1960 and as such, notice has to be issued to the governing body/ existing Committee, to be heard before an order of appointment of an Administrator is passed.
12.3. I am unable to agree with this submission also inasmuch as that enquiry is related to the
- 64 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR circumstances covered under Clause (c) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, and not to that covered under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, inasmuch as there is no further enquiry to be made when the term of the governing body of a Society has expired and a new governing body has not for any reason been constituted. Inasmuch as, admittedly, the term expired on 12.10.2025 (actually 11.10.2025), by which date no elections were held and no new governing body/Management Committee had taken charge.
12.4. The explanation which has been offered by the existing Committee that there will be disruption of work and/or handover cannot be made properly is only an excuse on part of the Committee to extend its term inasmuch as the Committee was always aware that the term
- 65 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR would expire on 11.10.2025 and it ought to have made necessary arrangements for audit, for completion of work or the like. Be that as it may, even if there are works which are pending, the new Committee could continue and complete those works, which cannot be a ground for extending the term of the existing Committee.
12.5. Hence, I answer point No.2 by holding that while exercising powers under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, the principles of natural Justice are not required to be followed, the existing Committee is not required to be heard, if the term of the existing Committee has come to an end and a new Committee has not taken charge in terms of Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, an
- 66 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374
WP No. 33814 of 2025
C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025
HC-KAR
Administrator would have to be
appointed, the only formality being an order to be passed by the state government, which is required to be published in the official Gazette.
13. ANSWER TO POINT No.3: Whether, while exercising powers under Clause (b) of Sub- Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, an enquiry under Section 25 of the KSRA Act, 1960, is required to be conducted before the exercise of such power.
13.1. Having answered point No.2 above, the principles of natural Justice are not required to be followed. Hence, the question of enquiry under Section 25, is also not required since I have already rejected the contention of Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, learned Counsel that on enquiry, the State Government, must consider it necessary in public interest to do so, would not apply to Clause (a) and (b), but it is only
- 67 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR integral and restricted to Clause (c) of Sub- Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960. 13.2. Hence, I answer point No.3 by holding that while exercising powers under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 27A of KSRA, 1960, no enquiry under Section 25 of the KSRA, 1960, is required to be conducted.
14. ANSWER TO POINT NO.4. In the present case, is the appointment of an Administrator proper and correct, or does it require any interference of this Court?
14.1. The facts being very clear that the term of the existing Committee having come to an end on 12.10.2025, it also being well established that there is no election has been held, the existing Committee had initially sought an extension by a period of six months and subsequently, had indicated that the election process would be commenced and completed by 05.01.2026. I am of the considered opinion that no attempt having been made by the existing Committee to conduct
- 68 -
NC: 2025:KHC:50374 WP No. 33814 of 2025 C/W WP No. 33855 of 2025 HC-KAR elections within the term of the Committee, the same would come under mischief of Section 27A, namely the very purpose of introducing Section 27A was to avoid such kind of a situation where the existing Committee were to seek to continue in office, the appointment of an Administrator being a formal order required to be passed, the same has been so passed and published in the official Gazette which therefore cannot be found fault.
15. Answer to Point No.5: What order?
15.1. In view of my answers to point Nos.1 to 4 above, no grounds being made out, the petitions stand dismissed.
SD/-
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE KTY List No.: 4 Sl No.: 1