Karnataka High Court
Monappa S/O Narasappa And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 7 December, 2023
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9091
WP No.200380 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO.200380 OF 2021 (CS-EL/M)
BETWEEN:
1. MONAPPA S/O NARASAPPA,
AGE: 78 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O KATLATKUR, TQ: RAICHUR,
DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.
2. NARASAPPA S/O TAYAPPA,
AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O KATLATKUR, TQ: RAICHUR,
DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.
3. ERANNA S/O D. NARASAPPA,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O KATLATKUR, TQ: RAICHUR,
DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.
Digitally signed
by SACHIN 4. RANGAPPA S/O DODDA NARASAPP
Location: HIGH AGE:50 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
COURT OF R/O CHANDRABANDA, TQ: RAICHUR,
KARNATAKA
DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.
5. PAGUNTAPPA S/O NAGAPPA,
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O CHANDRABANDA, TQ: RAICHUR,
DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.
6. SAVARAPPA S/O PAGUNTAPPA,
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O CHANDRABANDA, TQ: RAICHUR,
DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9091
WP No.200380 of 2021
7. NEELA NAIK S/O MUKUNDA NAIK,
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O SINGANODI TANDA, TQ: RAICHUR,
DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI MAHADEV S. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION,
M.S.BUILDING,
DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-01.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE
ELECTION AUTHORITY,
3RD FLOOR, SHANTHI NAGAR,
T.T.M.C. 'A' BLOCK,
SHANTHI NAGAR, BANGALORE-27,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
3. THE ELECTION OFFICER AND
JOINT REGISTRAR OF
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
KALABURAGI REGION, RAICHUR-24.
4. THE RETURNING OFFICER,
RAICHUR PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
BANK LTD. AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
TQ: AND DIST: RAICHUR-585 101.
5. THE PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
BANK LTD., RAICHUR,
TQ: AND DIST:RAICHUR-585 101.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI G. B. YADAV, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3;
NOTICE TO R4 AND R5 ARE SERVED)
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9091
WP No.200380 of 2021
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE, A)
DECLARE THAT, SEC.20 OF THE KARNATAKA COOPERATIVE
SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 IS AND ULTRA VIRUS CONTRARY TO
THE PROVISION OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND LACKS
LEGISLATIVE COMPETENCY; B) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE
OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR
DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO INCLUDE THE
PETITIONERS NAMES IN THE ELIGIBLE FINAL LIST AND
PERMIT TO WITHOUT INSISTING THE COMPLIANCE OF U/SEC.
20(2)(A-IV) OF THE ACT, 1959, BY RESPONDENT-5, IN SO FAR
IT PERTAINS TO PETITIONERS AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
High Court Government Pleader appearing on behalf of
respondent Nos.1 to 3/State.
2. This petition is filed seeking to declare Section
20 of the Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act, 1959 (for
short, 'the Act') to be ultra vires contrary to the provision
of the Constitution of India and lacks legislative
competency and also sought for the relief of mandamus
directing the respondents to include the petitioners' names
in the eligible final list without insisting for compliance of
Section 20(2) (a-iv) of the Act.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9091
3. The petitioners are the members/voters of the
Co-operative Society/respondent No.5, which is registered
under the Act. Respondent No.4 was appointed as the
Returning Officer to conduct election to thirteen posts of
directors for Society/respondent No.5. Pursuant to which,
notification was issued on 03.02.2020 fixing the date of
election to be conducted on 23.02.2021. Respondent No.4
prepared a list of voters and the names of the petitioners
have not been notified in the eligible voters list. The
petitioners intended to participate in the said election and
cast their votes as they are eligible voters and members of
the society.
4. It is the contention of the petitioners that the
names of the petitioners were not found in the voters' list
instead the names of the petitioners were entered in the
ineligible voters' list and they are not permitted to cast
their votes as they have not attended three general body
meetings as contemplated under the Act. It is further
contended that the petitioners have not received a single
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9091
notice of the general body meetings in several years and
the petitioners cannot be expected to attend the general
body meetings without notice from the society. According
to the petitioners, 97th amendment to the Constitution
came into force on 15.02.2012 inserting part IX-B. The
mandate under Articles 243ZH to 243ZT is framing State
Legislature to make law to regulate incorporation and
regulations of the Co-operative Society based on principles
of voluntary formation democratic member control and the
legislature of the State may by law provides access to
every member of the Co-operative Society kept in regular
transaction of its business with such members and the
State may make provision to ensure the participation of
members in the management of the Co-operative society
providing minimum requirement of attending meetings by
members and utilizing minimum level of services.
5. The petitioners being aggrieved by non-
inclusion of their names in the eligible voters' list to cast
their votes and so also challenging the amended provision
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9091
of Section 20(2)(a-iv) of the Act as unconstitutional and
arbitrary and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of
India.
6. Learned High Court Government Pleader
representing the State contends that in similar matter
wherein the constitutional validity of Section 20(2) (a-iv)
of the Act was questioned before this Court in
W.P.No.204109-113/2018 and other connected matters.
The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while considering the
constitutional validity of the above provision negatived the
challenge made to the constitutional validity of
Section 20(2) (a-iv) of the Act and upheld the Section
20(2) (a-iv) of the Act. Therefore, the first prayer sought
in this present petition would not survive for consideration
in view of the fact that the co-ordinate Bench of this Court
in W.P.No.204109-113/2018 and other connected matters
dated 13.03.2020 has already dealt with the matter and
decided the same by upholding the validity of
Section 20(2) (a-iv) of the Act.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9091
7. The amended provisions of the Act of 1959
namely Section 20(2)(a-iv) and (a-v) shall be effective for
elections to be held post disposal of writ petitions and the
elections already conducted, the persons who are elected
and continuing in the post shall not be disturbed till next
further elections are conducted.
8. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.48973/2019 dated 04.08.2021, it is held as under:
"Admittedly, the Amendment Act has received
the assent of the Governor on 10.01.2013. Learned
Advocates for petitioners have submitted that though
the Act has come into force in 2013, the same has
not been enforced till 2018. Thereafter, several writ
petitions have been filed in this Court. This Court, by
interim orders has permitted the members to vote
and participate in the elections. In view of the fact
that the amendment not having been enforced for
five years and this Court having granted interim
protection, the prayer made by the learned
Advocates for petitioners merits consideration,
because, pursuant to the interim orders, Members of
the Societies have participated in the elections and
many have won the elections. If the acts done by the
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9091
respective members of the Society as on date are
not saved, it will lead to a chaotic situation. In the
circumstances, it is just and appropriate to accept
the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners.
Accordingly, the amended provisions of the Act
namely, Section 20(2)(a-iv) and (a-v) shall be
effective for elections to be held post disposal of
these writ petitions."
9. The second aspect which is questioned by the
petitioners is with regard to the participation of the
petitioners to cast their vote as their names were included
in the ineligible list. However, in view of the fact that vide
interim prayer granted by this Court on 20.02.2021, the
petitioners were permitted to contest and cast their votes
in the election conducted on 23.02.2021 to the election
of respondent No.5. Pursuant to which, the election was
conducted and the petitioners participated and casted
their vote. Therefore, the second prayer also would not
survive for consideration. In view of the judgment of
the co-ordinate Bench of this Court as stated
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9091
supra, the present petition would no longer survive for
consideration. Accordingly, I pass the following :
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petition is disposed of in view of
the judgment of the Co-Ordinate Bench of
the this Court in W.P.No.204109-113/2018
and other connected matters dated
13.03.2020, wherein the constitutional
validity of Section 20 (2)
(a-iv), of the Act, is upheld and the
challenge made by the petitioners therein
was negatived would hold good in the
present case as well.
(ii) The second prayer is rendered infructuous
as elections are conducted and results are
declared.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RSP
