B Narasimhallu And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 9829 Kant

Karnataka High Court

B Narasimhallu And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 8 December, 2023

Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur

Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur

                                             -1-
                                                    NC: 2023:KHC-K:9106
                                                        WP No.200301 of 2021




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                          DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

                                           BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR


                         WRIT PETITION NO.200301 OF 2021 (CS-EL/M)


                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   B. NARASIMHALLU
                        S/O DODDA TIKKANNA,
                        AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        R/O RAJALABANDA, TQ: RAICHUR,
                        DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.

                   2.   SANNA MALLAYYA S/O LACHAMAYYA,
                        AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        R/O RAJALABANDA, TQ: RAICHUR,
                        DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.

                   3.   MALLAYYA S/O LACHAMAYYA
Digitally signed        AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
by SACHIN               R/O RAJALABANDA, TQ: RAICHUR,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.
KARNATAKA
                                                               ...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-
                                 NC: 2023:KHC-K:9106
                                     WP No.200301 of 2021




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-584 103.

4.   THE RETURNING OFFICER,
     RAICHUR PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
     AGRICULTURE AND RURAL
     DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. AND
     CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
     TQ: & DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.

5.   THE PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
     AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
     BANK LTD., RAICHUR,
     TQ & DIST: RAICHUR-584 103.
     REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

                                           ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI G. B. YADAV, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3;
NOTICE TO R4 IS SERVED)


     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A)
DECLARE THAT SEC.20(2)(A-IV) AND (A-V) OF THE
KARNATAKA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 AS ULTRA
VIRUS AND 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 THEM TO VOTE AND
CONTEST WITHOUT INSISTING THE COMPLIANCE OF
                                -3-
                                     NC: 2023:KHC-K:9106
                                       WP No.200301 of 2021




U/SEC.20(2)(A-IV) OF THE ACT, 1959 BY RESPONDENTS IN SO
FAR IT PERTAINS TO PETITIONERS AND ETC.

     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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(2) (a-iv) and (a-v) of the Karnataka Co-Operative

Societies Act, 1959 (for short, 'the Act') to be ultra vires

contrary to the provision of 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.

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

NC: 2023:KHC-K:9106

directors for Society/respondent No.5. Pursuant to which,

notification was issued on 03.02.2021 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

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

NC: 2023:KHC-K:9106

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

of Section 20(2)(a-iv) of the Act as unconstitutional and

arbitrary and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of

India.

NC: 2023:KHC-K:9106

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.

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

NC: 2023:KHC-K:9106

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 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

NC: 2023:KHC-K:9106

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 15.02.2021, 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 supra, the present

petition would no longer survive for consideration.

Accordingly, I pass the following:

NC: 2023:KHC-K:9106

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