Karnataka High Court
Prabhakar S/O Channappa Dabbannavvar vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 June, 2025
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7957
WP No. 101610 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 101610 OF 2025 (CS-RES)
BETWEEN:
PRABHAKAR S/O. CHANNAPPA DABBANNAVVAR,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
CHIEF PROMOTER,
PROPOSED KISAN VIVIDODESH PRATHMIK
GRAMEEN KRUSHI SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,
BAMBABLWAD, TQ: CHIKKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI-587116.
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. SANJANA S. MUDHOL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION,
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,
VIJAYALAKSHMI
M KANKUPPI CHIKKODI SUB DIVISION,
CHIKKODI, AT CHIKKODI,
Location: HIGH DIST: BELAGAVI-591201.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ...RESPONDENTS
DHARWAD
BENCH (BY SMT. MALA B. BHUTE, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
1. TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24/01/2025 IN NO. AR-
11/RSR/56/2024-25 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE
ANNEXURE-D.
2. TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENT NO.2 TO GRANT PERMISSION TO FLOUTING OF
THE SHARE AMOUNT FOR PRE-REGISTRATION OF THE SOCIETY
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7957
WP No. 101610 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE NAME OF THE PROPOSED KISAN VIVIDODESH
PRATHAMIK GRAMEEN KRUSHI SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,
BAMBALWAD, TQ: CHIKKODI BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION
IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS
MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Miss.Sanjana
S. Mudhol and the learned AGA for the respondents-State.
2. The petitioner is an agriculturist and permanent
resident of Bambalwad village, Chikkodi taluk, district
Belagavi. He was not enrolled as member of any of the
primary Co-operative Societies. The petitioner and other
similarly situated farmers have called for a Gram Sabha
meeting at Bambalwad village to address their grievances
and problems suffered by the farmers in the village and
therefore, decided to form a society in the name of Proposed
Kisan Vividodesh Prathmik Grameen Krushi Sahakari Sangh
Niyamit, Bambalwad, taluk Chikkodi to the welfare of the
farmers in the village.
3. In view of the same, the petitioner made a
representation to respondent No.2 on 21.12.2024 to grant
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7957
HC-KAR
permission for floating the share collection from the eligible
farmers for registration of the Co-operative Society in the
name of Proposed Kisan Vividodesh Prathmik Grameen
Krushi Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Bambalwad, taluk Chikkodi.
Respondent No.2 sent a letter to the Co-operative Inspector
requesting him to submit a report regarding economic
viability of the proposed society without hearing the
petitioner or notifying the petitioner. The Co-operative
Inspector submitted a report which was also without notice
and knowledge of the petitioner and based on the said
report, respondent No.2 without hearing the petitioner issued
a show cause notice dated 15.01.2025 and passed the
impugned order rejecting the proposal for grant of floating of
the share collection to the proposed formation of the society
by order dated 24.01.2025, which is impugned herein.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that respondent No.2 has rejected the proposal for
floating of the share collection only on the reason that it is
not viable and there could be overlapping of the society, that
there are already other existing societies registered in the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7957
HC-KAR
same area. Therefore, the question of the present society
being successful for overlapping other Co-operative Societies
already existing with the same qualities is against the
guidelines prescribed by NABARD.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that
the said reasoning provided by respondent No.2 is arbitrary,
illegal and unsustainable. It is without application of judicial
mind. There is no such requirement forthcoming under the
Act or the Rules for permitting floating of shares as what is
opined by the respondent. Whether there is a chance of
success of Co-operative Society and economic viability is the
requirement to be considered and no application of mind has
been applied by the respondent while passing the impugned
order and without even hearing and notifying the petitioner
has out rightly rejected the proposal for floating of share
collection for formation of the society.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the
judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.100493/2024 dated 06.02.2024 wherein in similar
matter on similar grounds the assistant registrar of Co-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7957
HC-KAR
operative Societies has rejected the application without
giving an opportunity to the petitioner to satisfy the
requirement and chances of success and viability. The writ
petition came to be allowed. Another judgment has been also
relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner in
W.P.No.104197/2021 which also goes in favour of the
petitioner for the reason that while considering the
application for economic viability and success of the floating
of shares, the respondent may not look into the existence of
societies or viability of the other Co-operative Societies. It is
only on the basis of information furnished by the promoters
that the Registrar is required to be satisfied on the proposed
floating of shares by the Society to have reasonable chance
of success and economic viability that is required to be
satisfied which has to be considered by the Registrar, which
has not been done in the present case.
7. Also it is not the case of the respondent that
there are other rival Co-operative Societies which have filed
any complaint or objection to the floating of shares of the
present petitioner or formation of the societies. Under these
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7957
HC-KAR
circumstances, there is force in the argument put forth by
the learned counsel for the petitioner and is appreciated by
this Court for allowing the petition. Hence, the petition is
required to be allowed. Accordingly, I pass the following
order:
ORDER
i. Petition is allowed.
ii. The impugned order dated 24.01.2025 in
No.AR-11/RSR/56/2024-25 passed by respondent
No.2 vide Annexure-D is hereby quashed.
iii. The respondent is directed to collect the share
amount for floating of the shares of society for
registration subject to the petitioner satisfying other
requirements of the law and provide an opportunity
to the petitioner before passing any such orders.
Sd/-
(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
JUDGE
KGK / CT-MCK
