Mahesh B H vs Praja Samsthe Ranasingh Pete (R)
2021 Latest Caselaw 5493 Kant

                              1


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

          DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                          PRESENT

       THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE

                            AND

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

          WRIT APPEAL NO. 1203 OF 2021 (GM-KSR)

BETWEEN:

MAHESH B H
S/O B R HANUMANTHARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
NO.210, POLICE ROAD,
RANASINGH PETE,
BENGALURU - 560 053.
                                          ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     PRAJA SAMSTHE RANASINGH PETE (R)
       NO.118, POORNAVENKATRAO ROAD,
       RANASINGH PETE,
       BENGALURU - 560 053
       REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

2.     SRI H RAVIKUMAR
       S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
       SECRETARY,
       PRAJASAMSTHE RANASINGH PETE (R)
                             2


     NO.118, POORNAVENKATRAO ROAD,
     RANASINGH PETE,
     BENGALURU - 560 053.

     R/AT NO.B801,
     ETA APARTMENTS GARDENS,
     BINNY STONE GARDEN,
     MAGADI ROAD,
     BENGALURU - 560 054.

3.   SRI BALALKRISHNA B N
     S/O LATE B N NARASINGAPPA,
     AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
     TREAUSRER,
     PRAJASAMSTHE RANASINGH PETE (R)
     NO.118, POORNAVENKATRAO ROAD,
     RANASINGH ROAD,
     BENGALURU - 560 053
     R/AT NO.14, CARPENTER,
     BYRAPPA LANE, RANASINGH PETE,
     BENGALURU - 560 005.

4.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
     PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION,
     M.S BUILDING,
     DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
     BENGALURU - 560 001.

5.   THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES
     CHAMARAJPET CIRCLE CO-OPERATIVE BUILDING,
     RACE COURSE ROAD,
     BENGALURU - 560 001.

6.   THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
     OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
     SECOND CIRCLE,
                                3


     BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,
     SHAKAR SOUTH, 18TH CROSS,
     MALLESHWARAM,
     BENGALURU - 560 003.
                                            ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R4 TO R6)


     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, PRAYING TO (1) SET ASIDE / MODIFY THE ORDERS OF
THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN W.P. NO. 50163/2021
ONLY TO THE EXTENT IT DIRECTS THE ELECTIONS TO BE HELD IN
TERMS OF ANNEXURE - Q AND THE SAME TO BE MODIFIED AS AN
ELECTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED IN TERMS OF ANNEXURE - U
WHILE RETAINING THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE ORDERS OF
THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND ETC.


    THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

The appellant who was respondent No.4 in the writ

petition is assailing the order dated 23.2.2021 passed in

W.P.Nos.50163/2019 c/w W.P.No.36223/2019.

2. The grievance of the appellant before this Court is

that the learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ

petitions directed the Administrator to conduct elections as per

voters' list produced at Annexure-Q to W.P.50163/2019. The

counsel for the appellant would submit to this Court that

having found the error in the order under challenge, a review

is filed and the same is pending in R.P.No.93/2021. The

learned counsel for the appellant would submit to this Court

that though respondent No.1 did concede for conducting

elections in terms of Annexure-U, however, since the order

under challenge refers to Annexure-Q, respondent No.1 is now

retracting from the said statement made before the learned

Single Judge and the said statement is being disputed and

therefore, the review petition could not be disposed of without

hearing first respondent-petitioner.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would

submit that elections are scheduled to be conducted on

5.12.2021 and in view of the peculiar circumstances, the

learned counsel for the appellant seeks indulgence on the

ground that elections have to be conducted in terms of

Annexure-U, which is an approved list of voters.

4. Per contra, learned Additional Government

Advocate appearing for respondent No.1 would however

submit that he needs instructions to ascertain whether

calendar of events are notified after publishing the voters' list.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for appellant

and learned Additional Government Advocate.

6. The apprehension of the appellant is that elections

will be conducted in terms of directions issued by the learned

Single Judge wherein a direction is issued to conduct elections

as per the voters' list produced as per Annexure-Q. The

Administrator is required to convene a meeting and thereafter

the concerned authority before proceeds to conduct elections

has to publish the voters' list. It is a trite law that election to

form a new governing body has to be held on the basis of roll

of members that existed as on the date the Administrator took

charge of the Society.

7. Be that as it may, if the authority has published

voters' list in accordance with law, the authority can proceed

further to conduct elections. If the voters' list is yet to be

published, then it is needless to say that the Administrator

cannot proceed with the elections without preparing the

electoral roll and notifying the same as contemplated under

the Act.

With these observation, the writ appeal stands disposed

of.

The pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand

disposed of.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

*alb/-