Karnataka High Court
Jayakumar Rayagouda Patil vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 August, 2023
Bench: Sachin Shankar Byssmj
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8943
WP No. 104974 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 104974 OF 2023 (CS-EL/M)
BETWEEN:
1. JAYAKUMAR RAYAGOUDA PATIL
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
2. SUMATI SURENDRA PATIL
AGE: 72 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
3. PRACHI SUNIL URF PARSHWANATH NARE
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
4. AKSHAY TATYASAHEB NARE
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
5. SUSHEELA RAVASAB PATIL
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
6. SHUBHANGI AJIT BORAGANVE
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
7. PADMASHREE VIDYASAGAR BORAGANVE
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
Digitally signed by
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
Location: DHARWAD 8. MAHAVEER DADASAB NARE
Date: 2023.08.18
17:45:31 -0700 AGE: 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
9. SUSHEELA NABHIRAJ PATIL
AGE: 70 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
10. KALPANA CHANDRAKANT PATIL
AGE: 57 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
11. BHARATI RAVASAB PATIL
AGE: 54 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8943
WP No. 104974 of 2023
12. ANITA PADMAKAR LATTHE
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
13. SANGEETA SANTOSH PATIL
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
14. BHARATI JAYAKUMAR PATIL
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
15. SUVARNA ASHOK PATIL
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
16. CHAMPABAI SEENAPPA UMAJE
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
17. INDUMATI SIDAGOUDA MURACHITTE
AGE: 64 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
18. AKKATAYI ANNU CHOUGALE
AGE: 81 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
19. BHARATI RAJAGOUDA DADDAPATIL
AGE: 64 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
20. PRIYANKA MAHAVEER NARE
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
SL.NO. 01 TO 20 ALL ARE R/O: BEDAKIHAL VILLAGE,
TALUK: NIPPANI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF CO- OPERATION
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-580001.
2. THE STATE CO- OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY
3RD FLOOR, A BLOCK, SHANTI NAGAR,
TTMC BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560002,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8943
WP No. 104974 of 2023
3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES BELAGAVI
REGION BELAGAVI, AND THE ELECTION OFFICER TALUKA LEVEL
AND BELOW DISTRICT AREA OF OPERATION OF ALL TYPES OF
PRIMARY OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIS, TALUK: BELAGAVI, DIST:
BELAGAVI, PIN: 590001.
4. THE RETURNING OFFICER
THE PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMIT
BEDKIHAL, TALUKA: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591237.
5. THE PRATHAMIKA KRISHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMIT
BEDKIHAL,
TALUKA: NIPPANI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI-591237,
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHIVAPRABHU S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
APPROPRIATE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENTS TO INCLUDE THE NAMES OF THE PETITIONERS IN
THE FINAL ELIGIBLE NON-BORROWER'S VOTER LIST AND TO PERMIT
THE PETITIONERS TO CAST THEIR VOTES IN THE ELECTION TO THE
COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT SOCIETY
SCHEDULE TO BE HELD ON 13/8/2023 AS PER THE CALENDAR OF
EVENTS DATED 12/07/2023 PUBLISHED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
VIDE ANNEXURE-A BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE; TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO DECLARE THE
ELECTION RESULTS OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT SOCIETY AFTER
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8943
WP No. 104974 of 2023
COMPLETION OF THE ELECTION PROCESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH
LAW.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and
the learned AGA would fairly submit before the Court that
the relief sought in the instant petition does not survive for
consideration and is squarely covered by the judgment
rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.8502/2022 C/W W.P.No.8477/2022.
2. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while
disposing of WP No.8502/2022 along with WP
No.8477/2022 at paragraph 10 and 12 has observed as
follows:
"10. These provisions do not leave any room
for doubt that an excluded member, with the
publication of the Draft Eligible Electoral List, must
have an opportunity by way of an individual notice
to file objections on exclusion from the Electoral
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8943
WP No. 104974 of 2023
List. It must be shown that the concerned Chief
Executive has prepared and sent notice to the
affected members. The Public Notice dated
8.11.2021 does not meet these requirements. In
fact, it is admitted on behalf of the respondents
that there are deficiencies in the preparation of the
Final Electoral Roll after the publication of the Draft
Eligible Electoral List, and the petitioners have not
been issued with individual notices.
12. It follows from this decision that the
adjudication of all questions must be as provided
under Section 70(2) of the Co-operative Societies
Act. However, in the present case the respondents
admit that there are deficiencies in finalization of
Final Electoral List. The petitioners are admittedly
not issued with individual notice as required under
the provisions of Rule 13-D (2-A) of the Co-
operative Societies Rules; the petitioners have now
cast their votes in the elections on 23.04.2022; the
petitioners are not given the opportunity to show
cause against the allegations that they have
created documents. The respondents, despite
admitting deficiencies in finalisation of the Final
Electoral List, want to invoke the rule of alternative
remedy. This Court is of the considered view that,
in the pecularities of this case, the writ petitions
should be disposed of with directions to the
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8943
WP No. 104974 of 2023
concerned respondent to announce results counting
even the votes cast by the petitioners and with
liberty to all the concerned to avail remedy under
Section 70(2) of the Act if aggrieved by the results.
If such remedy is availed raising a dispute,
exclusion of votes of those petitioners who are
guilty of fraud can also be considered based on the
material that will be placed on record."
3. Since the petition is identically placed and the
relief sought by the petitioners is identical, I am of the view
that the writ petition deserves to be disposed of in terms of
the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
WP No.8502/2022 along with WP No.8477/2022 disposed
of on 07.06.2022 and accordingly the following:
ORDER
i. Writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order
passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in
WP No.8502/2022 along with WP No.8477/2022
disposed of on 07.06.2022 and the returning
officer is directed to announce the results of the
elections that were held to the post of Board of
members of the respondent-Society forthwith,
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8943
WP No. 104974 of 2023
including the votes casted by the petitioners in
the petition.
ii. The petitioners as well as the concerned who are
aggrieved by the results so announced are at
liberty to avail the remedy under Section 70(2)
of the Act of 1959. All contentions urged in these
writ petition by the parties concerned are left
open for consideration in the appropriate
proceedings if commenced.
iii. In view of disposal of the writ petition, pending
interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive
for consideration and are disposed of
accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
NBM
