Karnataka High Court
Shri Guru Adavisiddeshwar Vidya ... vs District Registrar Of Sopcieties And on 5 June, 2024
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7505
WP No. 105538 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO.105538 OF 2022 (CS-EL/M)
BETWEEN:
SHRI. GURU ADAVISIDDESHWAR
VIDYA SAMSTHE (R), TQ. RON,
DIST. GADAG, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT,
HANAMANTAPPA S/O DARMAPPA TALWAR,
AGE ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. KOTABAL-582209, TQ. RON,
DIST. GADAG.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI M.M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF
SOCIETIES AND DEPUTY
REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
DIST. GADAG, GADAG-582101.
2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
DIST. GADAG, GADAG-582101.
Digitally signed
by
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
YASHAVANT
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
NARAYANKAR KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
BENCH
Date:
2024.06.11
12:45:42
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
+0530
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
4. BASAPPA S/O KALKAPPA MADAR,
AGE ABOUT 73 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. KOTABAL-582209,
TQ. RON, DIST. GADAG.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1-R3;
SRI S.S. BELURMATH AND
SRI K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATES FOR R4)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7505
WP No. 105538 of 2022
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR
DIRECTION TO THE RENEWAL OF THE GOVERNING BODY LIST FOR
THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2022-2023 IN REGISTER NO.72/1989-90 AS
PER ANNEXURE-F CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED: 27.09.2022 BEARING ITS
NO.DR/GDG/SAM.NOM/CR-02/2022-23 AS PER ANNEXURE-J IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is preferred by the society-Shri Guru
Adavisiddeshwar Vidhya Samsthe (R), Kotabal (for short,
'the Society') represented by its President seeking to quash
the endorsement at Annexure-F and Annexure-J passed by
the 1st respondent.
2. It is the case of petitioner-Society that it was
registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act,
1960 (for short, 'the Act, 1960') by Registration No.72/1989-
90. The governing body of the said Society from time to time
complied all the formalities as contemplated under the Act
and the Rules.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7505
3. It is the case of petitioner-Society that the copy of
the renewal for the academic year 2021-22 is produced at
Annexure-B by the petitioner who was conducting the annual
general body meeting as per the Act and the Rules by
following the Society bylaws. This being the state of affairs,
the 1st respondent surprisingly issued a notice dated
21.07.2022 to the petitioner stating that in respect of the
Society there appears a difference in all Governing body list
and it does not tally with the list maintained by the Society.
It is contended by the petitioner that the 4th respondent has
made a fictitious claim and has committed grave illegality
and committed fraud by including unnecessary unwanted
persons in the Society as members, which is not
inconsonance with the earlier Governing body list of
members furnished by the Society. Therefore, there is grave
irregularity and inconsistency in the list of members
furnished by respondent No.4 which was acted in
contravention to the interest of the Society by colluding with
the respondent authority. The copy of the renewal body list
and the endorsement issued by the respondent No.1 is
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7505
questioned here before this court, it is seen that there are
arrival claims between two groups of people trying to take
over the management of the Society and therefore the
petitioner-Society represented by the President, list of
members has not been approved and the list put up by
deceased respondent No.4 has been accepted, which is the
subject matter of this writ petition.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the said acceptance of the annual list under
Section 13 of the Act, 1960 is illegal as no notice has been
issued to the petitioner before finalizing or accepting such a
list and therefore he is before this court on the ground of
violation of non-issuance of the proper notice before
initiating any action or acceptance of the report under
Section 13 of the Act, 1960 so also for violation of principles
of natural justice.
5. Per Contra, the learned HCGP representing the State
contends that the respondent No.1-Deputy Registrar of the
Society is an authority to accept the balance sheet, annual
list of the Governing body which should be filed before the
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7505
Registrar on or before 14th day of the succeeding the day on
which the annual general body meeting of the Society is held
and the list of names, addresses and occupations of the
members of the governing body then entrusted with the
management of the affairs of the Society along with balance
sheet and income expenditure audited by a person under the
Companies Act, shall be filed with him. Accordingly, such a
list came to be filed and he has accepted the list and issued
an endorsement to the Society.
6. The petitioner-Society herein represented by the
President is aggrieved by such an endorsement as according
to this petitioner, respondent No.4 in his own whims and
fancies, has floated separate list of members of his own
choice, who are not the original members of the Society and
their names do not find a place in the membership register.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it
is apparently clear that there is some dispute between the
two groups of the Society which has made its own list of
members and has filed a list before the Registrar of Society,
that is respondent No.4 for acceptance under Section 13 of
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7505
the Act, 1960 that is audited accounts and annual list along
with the Bank statement to show the list of governing body
members, balance sheet and income and expenditure
account.
8. The Registrar is duty bound to except the said
statement filed by the Society members along with the
governing body and the copy of the balance sheet, income
and expenditure account. In case, any of the parties
aggrieved by any such list filed before the 1st respondent, it
is open to the concerned aggrieved party to approach the
Registrar, that is the Deputy Registrar under Section 25 of
the Act, 1960 raising a dispute with regard to any illegality
or otherwise and to conduct an inquiry in accordance with
law as contemplated therein under Section 25(1) and (2) of
the Act, 1960. The petitioner instead of challenging the same
before the Registrar or before any other forum has
approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India to declare the endorsement issued under Annexure-
F and J to be invalid and consequently to quash the same. I
am afraid that said argument of the petitioner cannot be
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7505
accepted for entertaining a petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, as the subject matter involves factual
issues between the two rival parties and when there is a
provision contained in the Act, 1960 to address such
anomalies which is contemplated under Section 25 of the
Act, 1960, the same shall be addressed before the said
authority and the petitioner is at liberty to approach the
Registrar and make his grievance and agitate all claims
whatsoever he has against the respondent and place such
materials for conducting the enquiry by the Registrar rather
than approaching and rushing to this Court under Article 226
of the Constitution of India.
9. Under the circumstances, I do not find much merit in
the contentions put forth by the petitioner. Though the
learned counsel for respondent No.4 has filed a memo
reporting the death of respondent No.4, he has relied on the
two Judgments of the Hon'ble coordinate bench of this Court,
which would be relevant for consideration in this case. The
Judgments produced are in the case of Nanjundaswamy vs.
The District Registrar of Socieities and Deputy Registrar
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7505
of Co-operative Societies, Gulbarga District, Gulbarga
and others, reported in (2010) 4 Kant L J 350 and in the
case of the Central Education Society (R) Urdigere,
Tumkur vs. The Secretary Department of Co-operation
and others, reported in (2014) 1 Kant LJ 338.
10. It is made clear that, if the petitioner is aggrieved
by any of the actions of the Registrar in acceptance of the
annual list, the general governing body members and the
income details produced along with the expenditure account
and balance sheet is at liberty to move the Registrar for
agitating his rights and claim. Under the circumstances, the
present writ petition would not be maintainable. Hence, I
pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Petition is dismissed.
(ii) However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner
to approach the appropriate forum for
redressal of his grievance in accordance with
law.
(iii) All contentions of the petitioner are kept
open.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7505
(iv) It is made clear that this Court has not
expressed any opinion with regard to the
merits of the matter.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CKK & MRK
CT:BCK
