Prathamika Krushi Pattina vs The Registrar Of Co-Operative ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3204 Kant

                               1




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                    DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

                           BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR

               W.P. No. 144571/2020 (CS-RES)
BETWEEN:

1.     PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATTINA SAHAKARI
       SANGHA NIYAMITA, KALHALLI, TQ: JAMKHANDI,
       DIST: BAGALAKOTE, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY/
       CHIEF EXECUTIVE SHRI SHIVALING SHRISHAIL
       GUDLI, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC.: SERVICE,
       R/O KALHALLI, TQ. JAMKHANDI,
       DIST: BAGALAKOTE.

2.    PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATTINA SAHAKARI
      SANGHA NIYAMITA, KALHALLI, TQ: JAMKHANDI,
      DIST: BAGALAKOTE, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
      SHRI SANGAPPA DUNDAPPA UPPALADINNI,
      AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC.: AGRICULTURE,
      R/O KALHALLI, TQ. JAMKHANDI,
      DIST: BAGALAKOTE.
                                            -      PETITIONERS
(BY SRI F.V. PATIL, NANDISH PATIL AND
REBEENA R.S. ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.     THE REGISTRAR OF
       COOPERATIVE SOCIETY,
       ALI ASKAR ROAD, BENGALURU.

2.     THE ASSISTANT REGISTERAR OF
       COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
       JAMAKHANDI, TQ. JAMAKHANDI,
       DIST. BAGALAKOTE.
                                     2




3.    BAHUBALI DHAREPPA HANUMAGONDA,
      THE CHIEF PROMOTER FOR
      ESTABLISHING PRIMARY KRUSHI
      PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGHA AT
      KALHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. JAMKHANDI,
      DIST. BAGALAKOTE.

4.    SIDDU K. SAVADI,
      MLA OF TERDAL CONSTITUENCY,
      TQ. BANAHATTI, RABAKAVI,
      DIST. BAGALAKOTE.
                                           -              RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V.S. KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1 & R2,
SRI SANJAY S. KATAGERI, ADVOCTAE FOR R3,
NOTICE TO R4 IS SERVED)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED
10.02.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-H & ETC.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                               ORDER

In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the

following reliefs.

a) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 10.02.2020 filed by the 2nd petitioner and its Directors vide Annexure-H and afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner society and its members and to the petitioner society and its members and to take a decision in terms of the judgment rendered by this Hon'ble Court in the case

of Prathamik Krushi Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit and others Vs. The State of Karnataka and others passed in Writ Petition Nos.102487-491/2018 and connected matters vide Annexure-J, in the interest of justice and equity;

b) A direction may be issued to the 2nd respondent not to process the application filed by the 3rd respondent on Nil.10.2019 vide Annexure-D and not to pass any others till the consideration of the representation filed by the petitioner No.2 and other members of the 1st petitioner society, in the interest of justice and equity.

c) Quash the impugned order vide Annexure-K dated 24.02.2020 in the interest of justice and for other reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

HCGP for respondents No.1 & 2 and the learned counsel for

respondent No.3 and perused the material on record.

3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions

urged in the writ petition by referring to various documents,

learned counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to

the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in

the case of Prathamik Krushi Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit,

Athani Taluk, Belagavi District and others V. State of

Karnataka and others reported in 2019 (2) Kar.L.J. 49 in

order to contend that the impugned order at Annexure-K

dated 24.02.2020 permitting the respondent No.3 to collect

the share capital is vitiated in as much as the same was

passed without issuing notice to the petitioners who are an

existing co-operative society and without hearing them or

following the procedure prescribed under Rule 3-B of the

Karnataka Cooperative Societies Rules, 1960. It is

therefore, submitted that the impugned order passed by the

respondent No.2 at Annexure-K deserves to be quashed by

this Court.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3 in

addition to reiterating various contentions urged in the

statement of objections, invites my attention to the decision

of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 100180-

100202/2019 dated 09.12.2019 arising out of the aforesaid

decision of the co-ordinate bench of this Court and submits

that the issue raised by the petitioner has been kept open

and as such no reliance can be placed on the decision of the

co-ordinate bench of this Court for the purpose of assailing

the impugned order.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival

submissions and perused the material on record.

6. As held by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in the

aforesaid decision, in the light of the undisputed fact that

the petitioner is an existing society and the parameters

contained in Rule 3(b) includes ascertainment as to whether

there is overlapping of the proposed society with an existing

society, in my considered opinion it would be just and

appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the

matter back to the respondent No.2 for reconsideration

afresh after affording sufficient opportunity to the

petitioners as well as the respondent No.3 to putforth their

respective claims and to pass appropriate orders in

accordance with law bearing in mind Rule 3(b) of the said

Rules of 1960.

7. Insofar as reliance placed on the order of Hon'ble

Division Bench in W.A. No. 100180/2019 is concernd, a

perusal of the same will indicate that the order of the

learned Single Judge has not been interfered with and the

question of law has been kept open and as such, the same

will not come to the aid of the respondent No.3 in the

present petition.

8. In the result, I pass the following order.

                             ORDER

i)     Writ petition is allowed;

ii)    Impugned order at Annexure-K is quashed;

iii) Matter is remitted back to the respondent No.2 for

reconsideration of the application filed by the respondent

No.3 afresh in accordance with law and after notifying the

petitioner and the respondent No.3 and granting them

opportunity to putforth their respective claims and hearing

them and to proceed further in accordance with law and in

terms of Rule 3(b) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies

Rules, 1960;

iv) All rival contentions urged by both sides in this

petition as well as in relation to all applications and

documents filed by them including the applicability / non-

applicability of the circular dated 24.06.2020 are kept open

to be adjudicated by the respondent No.2 while passing

appropriate orders as stated supra.

SD JUDGE bvv