Shri Beereshwara Devasthana Seva ... vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 749 Kant

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                    DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022

                        PRESENT

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT
                           AND
     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

             W.A. NO. 100317/2021 (GM-KSR)
BETWEEN:

SHRI. BEERESHWARA DEVASTHANA SEVA SAMITI ®,
MADLERI, TALUK: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
SRI DILLEPPA S/O SANNINGAPPA ANNER,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: SOCIAL SERVICE, R/O: MEDLERI,
TALUK: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI, PIN: 581 115.
                                         -     APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHIVARAJ P. MUDHOL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY
       ITS SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
       CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU-530 068.

2.     DISTRICT REGISTRAR AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
       CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, HAVERI, PIN: 581 115.

3.     THE TAHASILDAR AT POST: RANBEENNUR,
       DIST: HAVERI, PIN: 581 115.

4.    KARNATAKA VIKAS GRAMEENA BANK
      REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, MEDLERI,
      TALUK: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581 115.
                                     -    RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, GOVT. ADVOCATE)
                                2



     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY THIS COURT IN W.P. NO. 103792/2021
DATED 18.11.2021 BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE & ETC.

     THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE J.,
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                           JUDGMENT

The present writ appeal is filed under Section 4 of

the Karnataka High Court Act impugning the order passed

by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.103792/2021 dated

18.11.2021.

2. In terms of the impugned order learned Single Judge

has allowed the writ petition. However, in terms of

paragraph Nos.10 and 11 of the impugned order has

recognized the power of the Registrar under the Societies

Registration Act to take appropriate action. The

observations of the learned Single Judge found in

paragraph Nos.10 and 11 are extracted here as under:

"Liberty is however reserved to Registrar to take a decision regarding holding of enquiry either on his own motion or on an application of majority of members of the governing body or on the

application of not less than one-third of the members of the society.

It is needless to state that the Registrar can also exercise his suomoto act power on the basis of any complaint given to him regarding the alleged irregularities being conducted in the Society."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant is

assailing the aforesaid observations found in paragraph

Nos.10 and 11 of the order of the learned Single Judge

dated 8.11.2021.

4. The writ petition was filed challenging the

order dated 29.1.2021 passed by the Principal Secretary,

Co-operative Department directing Registrar to conduct

enquiry under Section 25 of the Karnataka Societies

Registration Act. The learned Single Judge is of the view

that the definition of the term "Registrar" found in Section

2(e) of the KSR Act does not include Secretary of the Co-

operative Department. Accordingly, the learned Single

Judge has quashed the order dated 29.9.2021 marked at

Annexure-E to the writ petition.

5. While allowing the writ petition by referring to

Section 25 of the Act the learned Single Judge in terms of

paragraph Nos.10 and 11 has observed that the power of

the Registrar to take appropriate action in terms of Section

25 of the Act is undisturbed by his order.

6. The learned advocate appearing for the

appellant would contend that the observations made in

paragraph No.11 are in the nature of direction to the

Registrar to hold enquiry and to take appropriate action.

The learned counsel would further urge that pursuant to

this order, the action will be initiated against the appellant.

7. This Court has perused the above said

observations. These observations cannot be construed as a

direction to hold enquiry. Learned Single Judge in terms of

paragraph Nos.10 and 11 has only reiterated the power of

the Registrar conferred under Section 25 of the KSR Act.

Pursuant to the power under Section 25 of the KSR Act, if

any action is initiated and adverse finding is given against

the petitioner it is open to the petitioner to challenge the

same in a manner known to law. This Court is of the

opinion that in paragraph Nos.10 and 11, the learned

Single Judge has not given any finding against the

petitioner-appellant.

8. There is no scope to interfere in the order

passed by the learned Single Judge and accordingly,

appeal is dismissed confirming the order passed by the

learned Single Judge.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE bvv