Karnataka High Court
Chikkalanerpu Agricultural Co ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 May, 2025
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
WP No. 21521 of 2024
C/W WP No. 22271 of 2024
WP No. 23570 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MAY, 2025
R
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 21521 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 22271 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 23570 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
IN WP No. 21521/2024
BETWEEN:
KAMAGANAHALLI MILK PRODUCERS WOMENS CO
OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,
KAMAGANAHALLI VILLAGE,
GAURIBIDANUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT,
REP BY ITS DIRECTOR
VEDA. S.K.
W/O SUNDARSHANREDDY,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
Digitally signed
by SHWETHA ...PETITIONER
RAGHAVENDRA (BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL. SR. ADVOCATE FOR
Location: HIGH SRI. DEVI PRASAD SHETTY., ADVOCATE)
COURT OF AND:
KARNATAKA
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION,
MS BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001.
REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIEITES.
BENGALURU REGION,
SAHAKARA SOWDHA,
MARGOSA ROAD, 8TH CROSS,
MALLESHWARAM,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
WP No. 21521 of 2024
C/W WP No. 22271 of 2024
WP No. 23570 of 2024
BENGALURU -560003.
3. KOLAR -CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CENTRAL
CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
DCC BANK ROAD,
KOLAR-563101
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
(REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES ACT-1959)
...RESPONDENTS
4. CHILKALANERPU AGRICULTURAL
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,
(SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
ACT-1959)
REP BY ITS PRESIDENT
SRI. B. SHEKAR
S/O LAE P. PAYANNA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
CHIKALANERPU CHELUR TALUK
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT.
5. JARABANDAHALLI AGRICULTURAL
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.
(SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
ACT, 1959)
REP BY ITS PRESIDENT
SRI. HANUME GOWDA J.V.
S/O J.N. VENKATARAMANA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
JARABANDAHALLI, MANCHENAHALLI TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTICT.
... INTERVENORS
(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA., AAG A/W
SRI. YOGESH D.NAIK., AGA FOR R1 & R2;
SRI. K.S. KALLESHAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR R3
SRI. SUBRAMANYA.R AS INTERVENOR)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER, QUASHING THE
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
WP No. 21521 of 2024
C/W WP No. 22271 of 2024
WP No. 23570 of 2024
ORDER ISSUED BY THE R2 DATED 20.02.2024 IN NO.
JRB/THIDDUPADI/2/26/2023-24 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-D
AND ETC.
IN W.P.NO.22271/2024
BETWEEN
RAMAPURA VYVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA
SANGHA NIYAMITH RAMAPURA
GOURIBIDANUR TALUK
CHIKKABALAPURA DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
SRI HAMUNATHA REDDY
S/O LATE RAMAIAH
AGE 67 YEARS AND ALSO DIRECTOR
KOLAR CHIKLKABALAPUR DISTRICT
CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK
KOLAR DISTRICT KOLAR
(REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES ACT 1956)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. M.R. RAJGOPAL., SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. H.N. BASAVARAJU., ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION,
MS BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001.
REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIEITES.
BENGALURU REGION,
SAHAKARA SOWDHA,
MARGOSA ROAD, 8TH CROSS,
MALLESHWARAM,
BENGALURU -560003.
3. KOLAR -CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CENTRAL
CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
NO.11, DCC BANK ROAD,
KOLAR-563101
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
WP No. 21521 of 2024
C/W WP No. 22271 of 2024
WP No. 23570 of 2024
(REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES ACT-1959)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA., AAG A/W
SRI. YOGESH D.NAIK., AGA FOR R1 & R2;
SRI. K.S. KALLESHAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT
OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDERS PASSED BY 2ND
RESPONDENT JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETEIS
BENGALURU REGION BENGALURU IN NO. JRB/TIDDUPADI-
2/26/2023-24 DATED 20.02.2024 AS PER ANNEXURE-j AND
ORDER DATED 03.08.2024 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN
NO. JRB/TIDDDUPADI-2/12(5) NIRDESHANA/2024-2 AS PER
ANNEXURE-K AND ETC.
IN WP NO. 23570/2024
BETWEEN:
1. CHIKKALANERPU AGRICULTURAL
CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,
(SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959)
REP BY ITS PRESIDENT,
SRI. B. SHEKAR,
S/O. LATE. P. PAYANNA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
CHILKALANERPU, CHELUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
2. JARABANDAHALLI AGRICULTURAL
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD
(SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959)
REP BY ITS PRESIDENT,
SRI. HANUME GOWDA. J.V.
S/O. J.N. VENKATARAMANA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
JARABANDAHALLI, MANCHENAHALLI TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. V.R. SARATHY., ADVOCATE)
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
WP No. 21521 of 2024
C/W WP No. 22271 of 2024
WP No. 23570 of 2024
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION,
REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
VIKAS SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIEITES.
BENGALURU REGION,
SAHAKARA SOWDHA,
MARGOSA ROAD,
MALLESHWARAM,
BENGALURU -560003.
3. THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION
AUTHORITY, REP BY ITS SECRETARY
3RD FLOOR, TTMC, 'A' BLCOK,
SHANTINAGAR,
BENGALURU-560027.
4. KOLAR & CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD.
KOLAR, KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT,
REP BY ITS CEO,
CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR-563101.
NO.11, DCC BANK ROAD,
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA., AAG A/W
SRI. YOGESH D.NAIK., AGA FOR R1 & R2;
SRI. T.L. KIRAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. K.S. KALLESHAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR R4;
SRI. M.R. RAJGOPAL., SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. H.N. BASAVARAJU., AS INTERVENOR)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A
APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE R-3 AND 4 TO CONSIDER THE
REPRESENTATIONS DTD. 15.07.2024 AND 07.08.2024 VIDE ANNX-A,
B, AND L MADE BY THE PETITIONER SOCIETIES, AND FURTHER
INCORPORATE THE AMENDMENT TO THE R-4 BYE LAW 9(A) AND
THEREAFTER HOLD ELECTIONS TO THE R-4 EXECUTIVE BODY BY
PROVIDING REPRESENTATION TO THE CHELUR AND
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
WP No. 21521 of 2024
C/W WP No. 22271 of 2024
WP No. 23570 of 2024
MANCHENAHALLI TALUKS IN THE R-4 EXECUTIVE BODIES, BOARD
OF DIRECTORS AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS AND
HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 21.03.2025, THIS DAY,
THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CAV ORDER
1. The Petitioner in W.P.No.21521/2024 is before this
Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order,
quashing the order issued by the R2 dated
20.02.2024 in no. JRB/Thiddupadi-2/26/2023-24
produced as Annexure-D
2) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order,
quashing the order issued by the R2 dated
03.08.2024 in No. JRB/Thiddupadi-
2/12(5)Nirdeshana/2024-25 produced as Annexure-
F.
3) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the
amended/corrigendum order dated 05.08.2024
passed by the respondent no.2 in No.
JRB/Thiddupadi-2/12(5) Nirdeshana/2024-25 is
herewith produced as Annexure-G.
4) Grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems
fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the
interest of justice.
2. The Petitioner in WP No.22271/2024 is before this
Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed
by the 2nd Respondent Joint Registrar of Co-operative
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
WP No. 21521 of 2024
C/W WP No. 22271 of 2024
WP No. 23570 of 2024
Societies Bengaluru region Bengaluru in No.
JRB/Tiddupadi-2/26/2023-24 dated 20.02.2024 as per
Annexure-J and order dated 03.08.2024 passed by the
2nd respondent in No. JRB/Thiddupadi-2/12(5)
Nirdeshana/2024-2 as per Annexure-K.
2) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing
respondent No.2 to accord approval to the amended
bye-laws, submitted by the R3 Respondent Bank in
view of Sec.12(3) of the Act, as per proposal
forwarded to the R2 vide letter in No.KDDCCB/YOD &
AA/9286/2023 dated 07.11.2023/5-12-2023 as per
Annexure-C.
3) Issue any appropriate writ, order or direction as this
Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case in the interest of justice
and equity.
3. The Petitioners in WP No.2370/2024 are before this
Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the
nature of Mandamus directing the R3 and R3 to
consider the representation dated 15.07.2024 and
07.08.2024 vide Annexure-A, B and L, made by the
petitioner societies, and further incorporate the
amendment to the 4th Respondent byelaw 9(A), and
thereafter hold elections to the 4th Respondent
Executive Body by providing representation to the
Chelur and Manchenahalli taluks in the 4th Respondent
Executive Bodies, Board of Directors, in the interest of
justice and equity.
2. Grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in
the facts and circumstances of the case.
Facts in W.P.No.21521/2024:
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
4. The Petitioner claims to be a registered Primary Milk
Producer Co-operative Society under the provisions
of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959
(for short, 'KCS Act') and the Karnataka Co-
operative Societies Rules, 1960 (for short, 'KCS
Rules'). The Petitioner claims to be operating within
the jurisdiction of the Kolar- Chikkaballapura District
Central Co-operative Bank Limited that is the 3rd
Respondent herein. The Petitioner claims to be
represented by the Director with the Board of
Directors having authorized the Director to file the
above petition.
5. The 3rd Respondent - Kolar- Chikkaballapura District
Central Co-operative Bank Limited (hereinafter
referred to as 'DCC Bank') is a Federal Co-operative
Society operating in the Districts of Kolar and
Chikkaballapura. The DCC Bank functions with the
assistance provided by the National Bank for
Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD),
which is routed through the Apex Society in the State
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Level called the Karnataka State Co-operative Apex
Bank (Apex Bank). The Apex Bank distributing the
funds to the DCC Bank, which operates at the district
level, which in turn distributes the financial
assistance to Taluka Agricultural Societies and
Primary Societies at the Taluka or Gram Panchayat
level.
6. In the present case, the composition of the 3rd
Respondent - DCC Bank is stated to be 21 Directors
which includes one Government nominee, a nominee
of the Apex Bank and the jurisdictional Joint
Registrar of Co-operative Societies (JRCS). It is
stated that the cause for the present petition arises
on account of new Talukas being established in
Chelur and Manchenahalli in Chikkaballapura District.
There being a requirement for representation of each
Taluka, the two new Talukas which have been
formed are also required to be represented in the
Managing Committee of the DCC Bank.
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
7. It is claimed that a General Body Meeting was
conducted on 12-8-2023 and one of the subjects was
regarding giving representation to Chelur and
Manchenahalli Talukas. The said subject could not be
taken up in the meeting on 12-8-2023. In the
meanwhile, two Primary Societies of Chelur and
Manchenahalli had filed W.P.No.19414/2023 and
W.P.No.19741/2023, seeking for a direction to the
DCC Bank to hold a Special General Body meeting to
consider the above subject. A direction came to be
issued by this Court vide its order dated 21-09-2023
to hold such a special general meeting, which was
convened on 6-11-2023, when a resolution was
passed to give representation on 'A' category to
Chelur and Manchenahalli by removing one Director
from 'F' category and one Director namely, the Apex
Bank nominee. The Housing Society having a
separate representative in 'F' category, in view of the
proposed amendment, the housing category was
included in 'G category by removing a separate
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
constituency for housing societies. The Resolution
passed in the Special General Meeting dated 6-11-
2023, produced at Annexure-C to the petition, is
reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
Annexure-C
PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÀgÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ
¨ÁåAPï ¤., PÉÆïÁgÀ.
¥ÀæzsÁ£À PÀbÉÃj, PÉÆïÁgÀ.
CAZÉ ¥ÉnÖUÉ ¸ÀASÉå: 11, r.¹.¹. ¨ÁåAPï gÀ¸ÉÛ, PÉÆïÁgÀ-563101.
¢£ÁAPÀ 06.11.2023gÀ ¸ÉÆêÀĪÁgÀ ¨É½UÉÎ 11.30 WÀAmÉUÉ ¸ÀjAiÀiÁV "PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤., PÉÆïÁgÀ EzÀgÀ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÀªÀð ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ
ªÀĺÁ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß "PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ r.¹.¹. ¨ÁåAQ£À PÉÃAzÀæ PÀbÉÃjAiÀÄ DªÀgÀt,
PÉÆïÁgÀ" E°è ¨ÁåAQ£À ¸À£Áä£åÀ CzsåÀ PÀëgÁzÀ ²æà ¨Á宺À½î JA. UÉÆëAzÀUËqÀgÀªÀgÀ
CzsÀåPÀëvÉAiÀÄ°è £ÀqɹzÀ «±ÉõÀ ªÀĺÁ ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ £ÀqÀªÀ½AiÀÄ «µÀAiÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå (3)gÀ GzÀÈvÀ ¨sÁUÀ.
«µÀAiÀÄB 3B PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ r.¹.¹. ¨ÁåAPï ¤., PÉÆïÁgÀ EzÀgÀ G¥À
¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ½UÉ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr vÀgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
wêÀiÁð£ÀB ¨ÁåAQ¤AzÀ ªÀÄAr¹gÀĪÀ n¥Ààt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÒ£ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ
DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¥Àj²Ã°¸ÀĪÀ ¸ÀAzÀ¨ÀsðzÀ°è ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ°è ºÁdjzÀÝ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À
¥Àæw¤¢üUÀ¼ÀÄ F PɼÀPÀAqÀ C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ/¸À®ºÉ/ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ¤ÃrzÀgÄÀ .
- ²æà ºÀ£ÀĪÉÄUËqÀ, CzsåÀ PÀëgÀÄ, dgÀ§AqÀºÀ½î ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ ¤.,
ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ EzÀ£ÄÀ ß ¥Àæw¤¢ü¹ ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár PÀ¼ÉzÀ 12.08.2023 gÀAzÀÄ ªÁaðPÀ
ªÀĺÁ¸À¨sÉ PÀgÉ¢zÀÄÝ CzÀgÀ°è G¥À¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ½UÉ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr «ZÁgÀªÁV ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèQUÉ
1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQUÉ 1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁV «µÀAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß
¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄAr¹zÀgÀÄ EzÀgÀ §UÉÎ ZÀZÉð £ÀqÉ¢zÀÄÝ, DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½UÉ ªÀÄ£À«
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
ªÀiÁrPÉƼÀÄîªÀÅzÉãÉAzÀgÉ gÁeÁåzÀåAvÀ EgÀĪÀ J¯Áè f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ½UÉ
Cr¥ÁAiÀÄ ¥Áæ.PÀÈ.¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÁVzÀÄÝ ªÉÆzÀ°UÉ ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ DzÀåvÉ ¤ÃqÀĪÀÅzÀÄ £ÀªÄÀ ä PÀvÀðªÀåªÉAzÀÄ w½¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. £Á£ÀÄ ¨ÁåAQ£À
G¥ÁzsÀåPÀë£ÁVzÀÝ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è PÉ.f.J¥sï. C£ÀÄß vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ PÉÃAzÀæªÁV ¸ÀPÁðgÀ DzÉñÀ
ªÀiÁrzÁUÀ ¸ÀzÀj «µÀAiÀĪÀ£ÄÀ ß ªÁ¶ðPÀ ªÀĺÁ¸À¨ÉsUÉ ªÀÄAr¹ PÉ.f.J¥sï. vÁ®ÆèQ£À MAzÀÄ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß PÀ°à¹zÁÝV w½¹zÀgÄÀ . CzÉà jÃwAiÀiÁV 3 ªÀµÀðUÀ½AzÀ FZÉUÉ
ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ C£ÀÄß vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ PÉÃAzÀæªÁV ¸ÀPÁðgÀ WÉÆõÀuÉ ªÀiÁrzÀ
£ÀAvÀgÀzÀ°è J¯Áè PÉ®¸À PÁAiÀÄðUÀ¼ÄÀ ZÀlĪÀnPÉUÀ¼ÄÀ ¸ÀzÀj vÁ®ÆèQ£À°è £ÀqÉzÄÀ PÉÆAqÀÄ
§gÀÄwÛgÀĪÀÅzÁV w½¹zÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAQ£À ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ DzÀåvÉ ¤ÃqÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ªÀÄÆ®¨sÆ À vÀ D±ÀAiÀĪÁVzÀÄÝ CzÀgÀAvÉ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆjUÉ vÀ¯Á 1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁV £Á£ÀÄ »A¢£À ªÁ¶ðPÀ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è
ªÀÄ£À« ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀÅzÁV w½¹zÀgÄÀ . ªÀiÁ£Àå CzsåÀ PÀëgÄÀ EzÉà «µÀAiÀĪÁV «±ÉõÀ ¸ÀªÀð ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ
¸À¨sÉ PÀgÉAiÀÄĪÀÅzÁV w½¹zÁVAiÀÄÄ ¸ÀªÄÀ AiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀjAiÀiÁV «±ÉõÀ ¸ÀªÀð ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ ¸À¨sÉ PÀgÉAiÀÄ°®è
DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÄÀ , ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ À gÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀgÀªÀjUÉ Cfð
¤ÃrzÁVAiÀÄÄ C°èAiÀÄÄ ¸ÀºÀ ¸ÀzÀj «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀÄ®Ä
ªÀÄÄAzÁUÀ°®è ¨ÁåAQ£À ZÀÄ£ÁªÀuÉ ºÀwÛgÀ ¸À«Äæ¸ÀÄwÛgÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÄÀ ß ªÀÄ£ÀUÀAqÀÄ ºÀ£ÄÀ ªÉÄÃUËqÀ DzÀ
£Á£ÀÄ dgÀ§AqÀºÀ½î «.J¸ï.J¸ï.J¸ï.J£ï. CzsåÀ PÀë ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ±ÉÃRgï
a®PÀ£ÉÃ¥ÀÄð «.J¸ï.J¸ï.J¸ï.J£ï. ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ DzÀ £ÁªÀÅUÀ¼ÄÀ ¨ÉÃgÉ ¨ÉÃgÉAiÀiÁV
jmï CfðUÀ¼ÀÄ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ºÉÊPÉÆÃmïð£À°è £ÀªÄÀ ÆzÀÄ ªÀiÁr ºÉÊPÉÆÃmïð£À°è ¸ÀzÀj jmï
DzÉñÀ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ¸ÁPÀµÄÀ Ö ZÀZÉðUÀ¼ÄÀ £ÀqÉzÄÀ WÀ£À PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ºÉÊPÉÆÃmïð DzÉñÀ
ªÀiÁrzÀÄÝ ¸ÀzÀj DzÉñÀzÀ ¥Àæw J¯Áè ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À §½ EgÀĪÀÅzÁV w½¹zÀgÀÄ
ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀzÀj «µÀAiÀÄzÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ ºÉÊPÉÆÃmïð ¤ÃrgÀĪÀ DzÉñÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è N¢zÀgÀÄ.
¸ÀzÀjAiÀĪÀgÀÄ ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár JµÀÄÖ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ½ªÉ JA§ÄzÀÄ ªÀÄÄRåªÀ®è MAzÀÄ PÉëÃvÀæ vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ
PÉÃAzÀæªÁV gÀÆ¥ÀÄUÉÆAqÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ¨ÁåAQ£À ªÀÄÆ®ªÁVgÀĪÀAvÀºÀ D vÁ®ÆèQ£À
¥Áæ.PÀÈ.¥À.¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ DzÀåvÉ ¤ÃqÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ FUÁUÀ¯Éà ºÉƸÀ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ PÉÃAzÀæªÁV
gÀÆ¥ÀUÉÆArgÀĪÀ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ºÁUÀÆ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ UÀ½UÉ MAzÀÄ ¥ÀævåÉ ÃPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁV ¸À¨Ás zsåÀ PÀëgÀ°è, DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ°è ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J¯Áè
¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ°è ªÀÄ£À« ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛgÄÀ ªÀÅzÁV w½¹zÀgÄÀ .
- ²æà ®QëöäãÁgÁAiÀÄtgÉrØ, CzsåÀ PÀëgÄÀ , £ÀA¢UÁ£ÀºÀ½î «.J¸ï.J¸ï.J¸ï.J£ï. aAvÁªÀÄtÂ
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ gÀªÀgÀÄ ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár ¢£ÁAPÀ 12.08.2023gÀ ¨ÁåAQ£À ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ºÁ° EgÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À°è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀzÉà AiÀÄvÁªÀvÁÛV ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgɸÀ®Ä
aAvÁªÀÄt vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¥Àæw¤¢üUÀ¼ÁzÀ £ÁªÀÅUÀ¼ÄÀ w½¹gÀÄvÉÛêÉ. ªÁ¶ðPÀ ¸ÀªÀð ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ
¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ¸À¨sÁzsÀåPÀëgÄÀ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨sÉ PÀgÉAiÀįÁUÀĪÀÅzÀÄ JAzÀÄ w½¸ÀzÀgÀÄ.
CzÀgÀAvÉ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨És PÀgÉAiÀÄzÀ »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ºÁUÀÆ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ
vÁ®ÆèQ£ÀªÀgÀÄ ºÉÊPÉÆÃmïð¤AzÀ DzÉñÀ vÀA¢zÁÝgÉ JAzÀÄ w½¹zÀÄÝ, ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèQUÉ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ PÉüÀÄwÛzÄÀ Ý, ¨ÁUÉÃ¥À°è vÁ®ÆèQUÉ 23
¥sÁåPïìUÀ¼ÀÄ, UÀÄr§AqÉ vÁ®ÆèQUÉ 08 ¥sÁåPïìUÀ¼ÄÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQUÉ 04 ¥sÁåPïìUÀ¼ÀÄ
§gÀĪÀÅzÀÄ JAzÀÄ w½¹zÁUÀ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQ£À J¯Áè ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀÄ EzÀPÌÉ «gÉÆâü¹ ZÉüÀÆjUÉ
08 ¥sÁåPïìUÀ¼ÀÄ EgÀĪÀÅzÁV w½¹zÀgÄÀ . £ÀAvÀgÀ ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár ²æà ®QëöäãÁgÁAiÀÄtgÉrØ gÀªÀgÀÄ
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
¥sÁåPïìUÀ½gÀĪÀ vÁ®ÆèPÀÄUÀ½UÉ 1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀĪÀÅzÉà DzÀ°è aAvÁªÀÄt vÁ®ÆèQUÉ 2
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁV ¸À¨ÉsUÉ w½¹zÀgÄÀ . E®è JAzÀ ¥ÀPëÀzÀ°è JgÀqÄÀ f¯ÉèUÀ¼À°è
EgÀĪÀ ¥sÁåPïìUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀªÀiÁ£ÀAvÀgÀªÁV «AUÀr¹ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁV E®è¢zÀÝgÉ
aAvÁªÀÄtÂUÉ 2 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁV ¸À¨ÉsUÉ w½¹zÀgÄÀ .
- ¨sÁ¸ÀÌgï, ¸ÀÄUÀlÆgÀÄ J¸ï.J¥sï.J¸ï.¹.J¸ï. CzsåÀ PÀëgÄÀ ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár r.¹.¹. ¨ÁåAQ£À
fêÁ¼À ¥sÁåPïìUÀ¼ÀÄ. ¥sÁåPïìUÀ¼À ¥ÀgÀªÁV PÉÆïÁgÀ f¯ÉèUÉ 6 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯ÉèUÉ 06
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀªÄÀ £ÁAvÀgÀªÁV ºÀAaPÉAiÀiÁVzÀÄÝ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ
JA.¦.¹.J¸ï.UÀ½UÉ 1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ¸ÁÜ£À, PÉÆïÁgÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ JA.¦.¹.J¸ï.UÀ½UÉ 1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
¸ÁÜ£À JgÀqÀÆ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ ªÀÄ»¼Á JA.¦.¹.J¸ï.UÀ½UÉ 1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀQ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁVzÀÄÝ,
vÁ®ÆèQUÉ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¨ÉÃPÀÄ JAzÀÄ PÉýgÀĪÀ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ
vÁ®ÆèPïUÀ½UÉ £ÀªÀÄä «gÉÆÃzÀ«®è JAzÀÄ w½¹ PÉÆïÁgÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è ¥Àæ¸ÄÀ ÛvÀ EgÀĪÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà PÁgÀtPÀÆÌ RrvÀUÆ É ½¸À¨ÁgÀzÄÀ . EzÀ£ÄÀ ß AiÀÄvÁ¹ÜwAiÀÄ°è ºÁUÉAiÉÄÃ
ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgɹ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è ¥Àæ¸ÄÀ ÛvÀ EgÀĪÀ 6 ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À°è §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉ ªÀiÁr ºÀAaPÉ
ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ «ZÁgÀzÀ°è PÉÆïÁgÀ f¯ÉèAiÀĪÀgÁzÀ £À«ÄäAzÀ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà «gÉÆÃzÀ EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è
JAzÀÄ w½¹zÀgÀÄ.
- UÀÄr§AqÉ vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¦.J¯ï.r. ¨ÁåAQ£À ¥Àæw¤¢ü ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄvÁÛ PÉÆïÁgÀ f¯Éè
ºÁUÀÆ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯ÉèUÀ½UÉ MAzÀÄ ¥ÀævåÉ ÃPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¨ÉÃrPÉ EnÖzÄÀ Ý F »A¢£À
¨ÁåAQ£À ¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è n.J.¦.¹.JA.J¸ï. ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀzÀ ªÀUÀðPÉÌ
¥Áæ.¸À.PÀÈ&UÁæ.C. ¨ÁåAPïUÀ¼À ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ªÀUÁð¬Ä¸ÀÄvÉÛÃªÉ JAzÀÄ ¤zÀðj¹zÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀj
«µÀAiÀĪÀÅ AiÀiÁªÀ ºÀAvÀzÀ°èzÉ JA§ÄzÀgÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ ¸À¨ÉsUÉ w½¸À° JAzÀÄ ªÀÄ£À« ªÀiÁrzÀgÀÄ.
- ²æà PÉ.JA. £ÀlgÁeï, PÀÄgÀħÆgÀÄ J¸ï.J¥sï.J¸ï.¹.J¸ï. ¥Àæw¤¢ü ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár
¨sËUÉÆýPÀªÁV PÉëÃvÀæ «AUÀqÀuÉ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ºÁUÀÆ ZÉüÀÆjUÉ ¥ÀævåÉ ÃPÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁV ªÀÄ£À« ªÀiÁrzÀgÄÀ .
- ²æà ZÀAzÀæ±ÉÃRgÀ gÉrØ, ¥Á¼ÀåPÉgÉ, «.J¸ï.J¸ï.J¸ï.J£ï. ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ
¥Àæw¤¢ü ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ DAzsæÀ¥æÀzÉñÀ UÀrUÉ ºÉÆA¢PÉÆArzÀÄÝ aAvÁªÀÄtÂUÉ
ºÉÆÃUÀ®Ä 40 Q.«ÄÃ. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¨ÁUÉÃ¥À°èUÉ ºÉÆÃUÀ®Ä 40 Q.«ÄÃ. DUÀÄwÛzÄÀ Ý, ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ ¥ÀævåÉ ÃPÀ
vÁ®ÆèPÁV ªÀiÁ¥ÀðnÖgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ £ÀªÄÀ UÉ MAzÀÄ ¥ÀævåÉ ÃPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤qÀ¨ÉÃPÁV
PÉÆÃjzÀgÀÄ.
- ²æà Dgï.¦. UÉÆÃ¥Á®UËqÀ, C®PÁ¥ÀÄgÀ JA.¦.¹.J¸ï. ¥Àæw¤¢ü ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄvÁÛ PÉëÃvÀæ
¥ÀÄ£Àgï«AUÀqÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ¸ÉÃjzÀÄÝ EzÀPÌÉ £ÀªÄÀ ä «gÉÆÃzsÀ
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è DzÀgÉ ¥ÀÄ£Àgï«AUÀqÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ «ZÁgÀzÀ°è UËj©zÀ£Æ À gÀÄ «zsÁ£À ¸À¨Ás
PÉëÃvÀæªÀ£ÀÄß G½¹ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î PÉëÃvÀæ ªÀiÁqÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è £ÀªÄÀ ä C¨såÀ AvÀgÀªÅÀ gÀĪÀÅ¢®èªÉAzÀÄ w½¹
EzÀPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ªÀÄ£À« ¥ÀvæÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨Ás zsåÀ PÀëjUÉ ¤ÃrzÀgÄÀ .
- ªÉÊ.©. C±ÀévïÜ£ÁgÁAiÀÄt gÀªÀgÄÀ ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄvÁÛ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄUÀ½UÉ 1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ FUÁUÀ¯Éà ºÉÊPÉÆÃmïð DzÉñÀ ¤ÃrzÀÄÝ,
DzÉñÀzÀ°è ¸ÀàµÀÖvÉ EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è «±ÉõÀ ¸ÀªÀð ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ ¸À¨És PÀgÉAiÀÄ®Ä DzÉñÀzÀ°è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ¸ÀàµÀÖ
¢£ÁAPÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄ ¤UÀr¥Àr¹ F PÀÄjvÀÄ PÁ®«Äw ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è 2018 gÀ°è
PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ ºÁ®Ä MPÀÆÌlzÀ Delimitation «ZÁgÀzÀ°è »AzÉ
¸À¨sÁzsÀåPÀëgÁzÀ vÁªÀÅ ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¸ÀªiÀ Á£À ºÀAaPÉ DUÀ¨ÉÃPÀAzÀÄ ªÁzÀ
ªÀÄAr¹zÀÄÝ zÁªÉ ºÀÆrzÀÄÝ UÀªÄÀ ¤¸À¨ÉÃPÀÄ CzÀgÀAvÉ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPïUÉ
¸ÀAAiÉÆÃd£ÉUÉÆArgÀĪÀ ¥Áæ.PÀÈ.¥À.¸À.¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÄÀ PÀÆqÀ MAzÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQ£À°è ºÉZÄÀ Ñ PÀrªÉÄ
¥ÀæªÀiÁtzÀ°è EzÀÄÝ EzÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÀªiÀ ÁAvÀgÀªÁV ªÀVÃðPÀj¸À¨ÉÃPÁV PÉÆÃj 3 jAzÀ 4 EgÀĪÀ
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À vÁ®ÆèQUÉ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀĪÀÅzÀÄ
¸ÀªÀÄAd¸ÀªÀ¯Áè JAzÀÄ w½¹zÀgÄÀ . ¥ÀÄ£À ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁrzÀ ªÉÊ.©. C±ÀévïÜ£ÁgÁAiÀÄt f¯Áè PÉÃAzÀæ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¨ÁåAPï£À°è ««zsÀ jÃwAiÀÄ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ªÀåªÀ¸ÜÉ EzÀÄÝ ¥sÁåPïìUÀ¼ÄÀ , JA.¦.¹.J¸ï.UÀ¼ÀÄ
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ºË¹AUï ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÄÀ EzÀÄÝ EªÀÅUÀ¼À°è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÀ£ÄÀ ß vÉUÉAiÀÄĪÀÅzÀgÀ ªÀÄÆ®PÀ
CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸À¯ÁUÀÄvÀÛzÉ JA§ÄzÀgÀ §UÉÎ ¸À¨ÉsUÉ ¸ÀàµÖÀvÉ ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁV PÉÆÃjzÀgÄÀ . ªÀÄÄRåªÁV
ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀ¢gÀ®Ä ªÀÄ£À« ªÀiÁrzÀgÄÀ .
- gÁeÉÃAzÀæUËqÀ, ¥Áæ.¸À.PÀÈ. & UÁæ.C. ¨ÁåAPï ªÀÄļÀ¨ÁV®Ä ¥Àæw¤¢ü gÀªÀgÄÀ ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár
F »AzÉ £ÀqÉzÀ ¨ÁåAQ ªÁ¶ðPÀ ªÀĺÁ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ°è ¥Áæ.¸À.PÀÈ. & UÁæ.C. ¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ½UÉ 1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
¸ÁÜ£ÀzÀ ¨ÉÃrPÉ ElÄÖ ªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨Ás zsåÀ PÀëgÄÀ ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár ¥ÀævåÉ ÃPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀ®Ä ¸ÁzsåÀ «®èzÝÀ jAzÀ
n.J.¦.¹.JA.J¸ï.UÀ¼À eÉÆvÉUÉ MlÄÖUÆ À r¹ JgÀqÄÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ ¥Áæ.¸À.PÀÈ. & UÁæ.C. ¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ½UÉ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀĪÀÅzÁV w½¹zÀgÄÀ . ¸ÀzÀj «µÀAiÀĪÁV ¨ÉʯÁ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr DVgÀÄvÀÛzÉAiÉÄÃ
E®èªÉà JA§ÄzÀgÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ ¥ÀæUÀw §UÉÎ ¸À¨sÉUÉ w½¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ªÀiÁ£Àå CzsåÀ PÀëgÄÀ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀÄÄRå
PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀðºÀuÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄ£À« ªÀiÁrzÀÝ£ÄÀ ß zÁR°¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.
- ²æà dUÀ£ï£ÁxÀ, ©¸À®ºÀ½î «.J¸ï.J¸ï.J¸ï.J£ï. ¥Àæw¤¢ü ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄ ¸ÀPÁðgÀ ºÉƸÀ
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ D ¥ÀæzÉñÀ C©üªÈÀ ¢Ý DUÀ¯èÉA§ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ eÉÆvÉUÉ FUÁUÀ¯ÉÃ
JgÀqÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÀÄUÀ¼À°è ±ÁSÉ vÉgÉAiÀÄ®Ä C£ÀĪÀÄw zÉÆgÉwzÀÄÝ PÉ®ªÀÅ ¥Àæw¤¢üUÀ¼ÀÄ
ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀĪÁUÀ CªÉÊeÁÕ¤PÀ JA§ ¥ÀzÀ «gÉÆâü¹ EzÀÄ ¸ÀjAiÀiÁzÀÄzÀ®è JA§ÄzÁV
w½¹zÀgÀÄ. ¸ÀzÀj «µÀAiÀĪÀÅ »A¢£À ªÁ¶ðPÀ ¸À¨ÉsUÉ ZÀZÉðUÉ §AzÀÄ ZÀZÉð
C¥ÀÆtðªÁVzÀÝjAzÁÝV «±ÉõÀ ¸À¨És PÀgÉAiÀÄĪÀ ªÀÄÆ®PÀ «µÀAiÀÄzÀ §UÉÎ ¸ÀÄ¢ÃWÀð ZÀZÉð
£Àqɹ wêÀiÁð£À vÉUÉzÀÄPÉƼÀÄîªÅÀ zÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ºÉƸÀ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ gÀZÀ£É
GzÉÝñÀªÀÅ D ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ C©üªÈÀ ¢Ý DVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀzÀj «µÀAiÀÄzÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ §¼À¹gÀĪÀ
CªÉÊeÁÕ¤PÀ ¥ÀzÀ §¼ÀPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÁ¥À¸ÄÀ ì ¥ÀqÉAiÀÄ° JAzÀÄ ªÀÄ£À« ªÀiÁrzÀgÄÀ . DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ºÁUÀÆ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ UÀ½UÉ ¥ÀævåÉ ÃPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁV
PÉÆÃjzÀgÀÄ.
- ²æà £ÀgÀ¹AºÀªÀÄÆwð, UËj©zÀ£Æ À gÀÄ, PÀ¸À¨Á «.J¸ï.J¸ï.J¸ï.J£ï. ¥Àæw¤¢ü
ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár PÀ¸À¨Á, ºÉƸÀÆgÀÄ, r. ¥Á¼Àå ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÀUÀgÉUÉgÉ «.J¸ï.J¸ï.J¸ï.J£ï. UÀ¼À£ÀÄß
UËj©zÀ£ÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQ£À°è G½¹PÉƼÀî®Ä ªÀÄ£À« ªÀiÁrzÀgÄÀ ºÁUÀÆ UËj©zÀ£Æ À gÀÄ
vÁ®ÆèQ£À AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ºÉÆç½UÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½îUÉ ¤ÃqÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è £ÀªÄÀ ä «gÉÆÃzsÀ«zÀÄÝ,
ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½îUÉ ¥ÀævÉåÃPÀªÁV ¥ÁåPïìUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ¤ÃqÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è £ÀªÄÀ ä AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà «gÉÆÃzsÀ«®è
JA§ÄzÁV w½¹zÀgÀÄ.
¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄzsÀå ¥ÀæªÉò¹ ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁrzÀ ¥Áæ.¸À.PÀÈ.&UÁæ.C. ¨ÁåAPï ¥Àæw¤¢ü
gÁeÉÃAzÀæUËqÀ gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß UÉÆAzÀ®PÉÌ zÀÆqÀ¯ÁUÀÄwÛzÄÀ Ý ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À PÁAiÉÄÝ PÀ®A
¥ÀæPÁgÀ 18PÉÌ «ÄÃgÀĪÀAw®è JA§ÄzÁVzÀÄÝ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆjUÉ ¥ÀævåÉ ÃPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À
¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ w½¸ÀÄwÛzÀÄÝ AiÀiÁªÀ ªÀUÀðªÀ£ÄÀ ß vÉUÉzÀÄ ¸ÉÃ¥Àðr¸ÀÄwÛÃgÀ JA§ÄzÀgÀ §UÉÎ ¸À¨sÉUÉ
¸ÀàµÀÖ ªÀiÁ»w ¤ÃqÀĪÀAvÉ ¸À¨sÁzsåÀ PÀëjUÉ ªÀÄ£À« ªÀiÁrzÀgÄÀ . EzÀPÌÉ GvÀÛj¹zÀ ¸À¨sÁzsåÀ PÀëgÄÀ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ vÀé
ªÀUÀðªÀ£ÀÄß vÉUÉAiÀÄĪÀÅzÀÄ ¸ÉÃ¥ÀðqÉUÆ É ½¸ÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ¸ÀªÀð ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ wêÀiÁð£ÀPÌÉ M¼À¥n
À ÖgÄÀ ªÀÅzÀjAzÀ
¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ wêÀiÁð£À CAwªÀÄ JA§ÄzÁV w½¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgÉzÄÀ ¸À¨sÁzsåÀ PÀëgÀÄ
ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄvÁÛ JgÀqÀÄ f¯ÉèUÀ¼À°è ¥Àæw vÁ®ÆèQ£À°ègÄÀ ªÀ MlÄÖ ¥ÁåPïìUÀ¼À CAQªÁgÀÄ
ªÀiÁ»wAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À¨sÁzsÀåPÀëgÀÄ ¸À¨ÉsUÉ ªÀiÁ»w MzÀV¹zÀ£ÄÀ ß zÁR®Ä ªÀiÁqÀ¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ. ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ
¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À «ZÁgÀPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ PÉÆïÁgÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà UÉÆAzÀ®«gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. PÉêÀ®
aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è F «ZÁgÀ GzÀ㫹zÀÄÝ ªÀÄÄRåªÁV F «µÀAiÀÄ UËj©zÀ£Æ À gÀÄ,
¨ÁUÉ¥À°è, aAvÁªÀÄt vÁ®ÆèQ£ÀzÝÉ Ã DVzÀÄÝ F ªÀÄÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÁå¦ÛUÉ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 92
¥ÁåPïìUÀ¼ÀÄ §gÀ°zÀÄÝ 92 ¥ÁåPïìUÀ¼ÄÀ ªÁ妹gÀĪÀ F ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ §gÀ°zÀÄÝ ¸ÀzÀj vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ UÀ¼À°è ±ÁSÉ vÉgÉAiÀÄ®Ä Dgï.©.L. ¤AzÀ C£ÀĪÀÄw
¹QÌgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ PÁAiÉÄÝ ¥ÀæPÁgÀ 18 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¹zÀÄÝ EzÀ£ÀÄß
«ÄÃgÀĪÀAw®è JA¢gÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ Common Ratio jÃwAiÀiÁV 92 ¥ÁåPïìUÀ¼ÄÀ ªÁ妹gÀĪÀ
aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è AiÀiÁªÀ jÃw ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÀÄ J£ÀÄߪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ ¸ÀªÀð ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ
¤ÃqÀĪÀAvÉ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è PÉÆÃjzÀgÄÀ .
ªÉÄîÌAqÀAvÉ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ZÀað¹zÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ¸À¨Ás zsåÀ PÀëgÀÄ G¥À¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß F
PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ªÀÄvÀPÌÉ ºÁPÀ®Ä ¸ÀÆa¹zÁUÀ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ºÁdjzÀÝ J®è
¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ¼À PÉÊ ªÉÄïÉvÀÄÛªÀÅzÀgÀ ªÀÄÆ®PÀ vÀªÄÀ ä vÀªÀÄä M¦àUÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀÆa¹zÀgÄÀ .
G¥À G¥À ¤AiÀĪÀÄ ºÁ° EzÀÝAvÉ G¥À¤AiÀĪÀÄ wzÀÝ¥Àr DzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrUÉ
¤AiÀĪÀÄ PÁgÀtUÀ¼ÄÀ
¸ÀASÉå
4(1) ¥Á®Ä §AqÀªÁ¼À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ vÀéB ¥Á®Ä §AqÀªÁ¼À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ vÀéB GZÀÑ
£ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ
¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀéB ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ vÀéB DzÉñÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
¥Á®Ä §AqÀªÁ¼ÀB ¥Á®Ä §AqÀªÁ¼ÀB
¨ÁåAQ£À µÉÃgÀÄ §AqÀªÁ¼ÀªÀÅ PɼÀV£ÀAvÉ ¨ÁåAQ£À µÉÃgÀÄ §AqÀªÁ¼ÀªÀÅ PɼÀV£ÀAvÉ ªÀÄÄR
ªÀÄÄR ¨É¯ÉAiÀÄļÀî µÉÃgÀÄUÀ½AzÀ ¨É¯ÉAiÀÄļÀî µÉÃgÀÄUÀ½AzÀ PÀÆrgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ,
PÀÆrgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ,
1. 'J' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
1. 'J' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
2. '©' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
2. '©' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
3. '¹' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
3. '¹' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
4. 'r' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
4. 'r' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ gÀÆ.25,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.25,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
5. 'E' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
5. 'E' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ gÀÆ.25,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.25,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
6. 'J¥sï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ
6. 'J¥sï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
7. 'f' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
7. 'f' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ gÀÆ.1,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
8. 'ºÉZï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ
8. 'ºÉZï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.10,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.1,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
9. 'L' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
9. 'L' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ gÀÆ.100.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.10000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
10. 'eÉ' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ
µÉÃjUÉ gÀÆ.100.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
ªÉÄð£À ¥Á®Ä §AqÀªÁ¼À ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ vÀéPÌÉ
«ªÀgÀuÉB
1. 'J' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¨ÁåAQ£À ªÉÄð£À ¥Á®Ä §AqÀªÁ¼À ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ vÀéPÌÉ «ªÀgÀuÉB
ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è£À ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
2. '©' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ 1. 'J' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¨ÁåAQ£À
PÀȶ GvÀà£Àß ªÀiÁgÁl ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è£À ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
2. '©' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ
ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÉÆÃvÀà£Àß ªÀiÁgÁl ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÀȶ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ UÁæ«ÄÃt
3. '¹' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀUÀļÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀlÖt C©üªÀÈ¢Ý ¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
¸ÀºÀPÁj ¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ½UÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀȶAiÉÄÃvÀgÀ
3. '¹' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀUÀļÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀlÖt ¸ÀºÀPÁj
¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ½UÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀȶAiÉÄÃvÀgÀ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
4. 'r' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÁ®Ä
GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ
ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ (ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á 4. 'r' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹). ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ
(ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
5. 'E' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÁ®Ä ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹).
GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ
ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
6. 'J¥sï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ 5. 'E' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
ªÀÄlÖzÀ UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ & EvÀgÉ J¯Áè
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. jÃwAiÀÄ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ
ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
7. 'f' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß 1, 2, 3, 4,
5 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 6 £ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ (J, ©, ¹, 6. 'J¥sï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß 1, 2, 3 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
r, E ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J¥sï) ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß 5£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ (J, ©, ¹, r ªÀÄvÀÄÛ E)
ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ EvÀgÉ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ EvÀgÉ
ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
7. 'f' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À PÁAiÉÄÝ
1959gÀ PÀ®A 16 gÀrAiÀÄ°è CºÀðvÉ EgÀĪÀ
¸ÀAWÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÉÃjzÀAvÉ EvÀgÉ
PÁ¥ÉÆÃðgÉÃmï ¨ÁrUÀ¼ÀÄ, J¯ï.L.¹.,
J.¦.JA.¹. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀܽÃAiÀÄ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ
ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. F CªÀPÁ±ÀzÀ°è ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé ¥ÀqÉzÀ
¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ½UÉ DqÀ½vÀzÀ°è, ¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ
¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ°è ¨sÁUÀªÀ»¸ÀĪÀ ºÀPÀÄÌ EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è.
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
8. 'ºÉZï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ 8. 'ºÉZï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß gÁdå ¸ÀPÁðgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À PÁAiÉÄÝ 1959gÀ PÀ®A 16 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå ¸ÀºÀPÁj C¥ÉPïì ¨ÁåAQUÉ
gÀrAiÀÄ°è CºÀðvÉ EgÀĪÀ ¸ÀAWÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ¼ÀÄ ¤ÃqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
¸ÉÃjzÀAvÉ EvÀgÉ PÁ¥ÉÆÃðgÉÃmï ¨ÁrUÀ¼ÀÄ,
J¯ï.L.¹., J.¦.JA.¹. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀܽÃAiÀÄ
¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. F
CªÀPÁ±ÀzÀ°è ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé ¥ÀqÉzÀ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ½UÉ
DqÀ½vÀzÀ°è, ¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ°è
¨sÁUÀªÀ»¸ÀĪÀ ºÀPÀÄÌ EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è.
9. 'L' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß gÁdå
¸ÀPÁðgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå ¸ÀºÀPÁj
C¥ÉPïì ¨ÁåAQUÉ ¤ÃqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
10. 'eÉ' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄ ¨ÁåAQ£À ¸ÀºÀ
¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÁªÀĪÀiÁvÀæ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé ºÁUÀÆ
ªÀåQÛUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÁÝVzÀÄÝ, 9. 'L' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄ ¨ÁåAQ£À ¸ÀºÀ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé
EªÀgÀÄ ¸À°è¸À¨ÉÃPÁgÀ µÉÃgÀÄ ºÀt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÁªÀĪÀiÁvÀæ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé ºÁUÀÆ ªÀåQÛUÀ½UÉ
gÀÆ.100.00 UÀ¼ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÁÝVzÀÄÝ, EªÀgÀÄ ¸À°è¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀ
µÉÃgÀÄ ºÀt gÀÆ.100.00 UÀ¼ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
9(J) DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½B DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½B GZÀÑ
£ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ
¨ÁåAQ£À PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀðºÀuÉAiÀÄ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥À£É ¨ÁåAQ£À PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀðºÀuÉAiÀÄ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥À£É DzÉñÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤zÉÃð±À£ÀªÀÅ PɼÀV£ÀAvÉ ªÀÄÄRå ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤zÉÃð±À£ÀªÀÅ PɼÀV£ÀAvÉ ªÀÄÄRå PÁAiÀÄð
PÁAiÀÄ𠤪ÁðºÀPÀ£À£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ 21 ¤ªÀðºÀuÁ¢üPÁjAiÀĪÀgÀ£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ 21
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ£ÉÆß¼ÀUÉÆAqÀ DqÀ½vÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ£ÉÆß¼ÀUÉÆAqÀ DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è
ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è ¤»vÀªÁVgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. ¤»vÀªÁVgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
1 ¥Àæw vÁ®ÆèQ£À 12 1 PÉÆïÁgÀ vÁ®ÆèQ£À 14
(§AUÁgÀ¥ÉÃmÉ (ºÀ£ÉßgÀqÀÄ ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À (ºÀ¢£Á®ÄÌ
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ d£À ¤zÉÃð±À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ d£À ¤zÉÃð±À
ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹) ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ PÀgÀÄ)
PÀgÀÄ)
M§âgÀAvÉ DAiÀiÁAiÀiÁ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ
PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ 2 ªÀiÁ®ÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQ£À
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
(ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ / ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¨ÁåAPÀÄ /
gÉÊvÀgÀ ¸ÉêÁ 3 §AUÁgÀ¥ÉÃmÉ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ
/ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀ / gÉÊvÀgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¸ÀAWÀ CxÀªÁ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà 4 PÉ.f.J¥sï. vÁ®ÆèQ£À
ºÉ¸Àj¤AzÀ ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
PÀgÉAiÀÄ®àqÀĪÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄ)
vÀªÉÆä¼ÀVAzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
M§â ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ §AUÁgÀ¥ÉÃmÉ
vÁ®ÆèQ£À G½zÀ
¨sÁUÀ¢AzÀ 5 ªÀÄļÀ¨ÁV®Ä
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ
M§â ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ. PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
6 ²æäªÁ¸À¥ÀÄgÀ
vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ
PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
7 aAvÁªÀÄt vÁ®ÆèQ£À
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
8 ²qÀèWÀlÖ vÁ®ÆèQ£À
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
9 aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ
vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ
PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
10 UÀÄr§AqÉ vÁ®ÆèQ£À
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
11 ¨ÁUÉÃ¥À°è vÁ®ÆèQ£À
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
12 UËj©zÀ£ÀÆgÀÄ
(ºÉƸÀÆgÀÄ, PÀ¸À¨Á
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÀUÀgÀUÉgÉ
ºÉÆç½UÀ¼À)
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
13 ZÉîÄgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQ£À
(ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
a®PÀ®£ÉÃ¥ÀÄð
ºÉÆç½UÀ¼À)
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
14 ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î
(ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î,
vÉÆAqɨÁ« ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
r. ¥Á¼Àå
ºÉÆç½UÀ¼À)
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ.
(ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ/ gÉÊvÀgÀ
¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀ/ ¸ÉêÁ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ
CxÀªÁ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÃ
ºÉ¸Àj¤AzÀ
PÀgÉAiÀÄ®àqÀĪÀ
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÀÄ)
2. ¨ÁåAQ£À 1 (M§â
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ §gÀĪÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
JgÀqÀÆ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ J¯Áè
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ
ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÉÆÃvÀà£Àß
ªÀiÁgÁl ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
(TAPCMS) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
PÀȶ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ UÁæ«ÄÃt
C©üªÀÈ¢Ý
¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ.
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
3. DAiÀiÁ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ ºÁ®Ä 2 (JgÀqÀÄ
GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ d£À ¤zÉÃð±À
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ PÀgÄÀ )
E§âgÀÄ ¤zÉñÀPÀgÀÄ
(ªÀÄ»¼Á ºÁ®Ä
GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹)
4 ¨ÁåAQ£À 1 (M§â
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ §gÀĪÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀQ)
JgÀqÀÆ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ
ªÀÄ»¼Á ºÁ®Ä
GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
EvÀgÉ J¯Áè jÃwAiÀÄ
ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
5 ªÉÄÃ¯É £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ 1 (M§â
(1), (2), (3) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
(4) ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹
¨ÁåAQ£À
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ §gÀĪÀ
2 ¨ÁåAQ£À 1 (M§â E¤ßvÀgÉ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ) ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
§gÀĪÀ JgÀqÀÆ ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
f¯ÉèAiÀÄ J¯Áè M§â ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ PÀȶ
GvÀà£Àß ªÀiÁgÁl 6 ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À 1 (M§â
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
(TAPCMS)
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ.
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
3 DAiÀiÁ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ 2 (JgÀqÀÄ
ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ d£À ¤zÉÃð±À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
PÀgÄÀ )
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
E§âgÀÄ ¤zÉñÀPÀgÀÄ
(ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
7 gÁdå ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ 1 (M§â
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
£Á«Ä¤ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹)
4 ¨ÁåAQ£À 1 (M§â
§gÀĪÀ JgÀqÀÆ
f¯ÉèAiÀÄ ºÁ®Ä (d£À
GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¤zÉÃð±À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
PÀgÄÀ )
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
5 ¨ÁåAQ£À 1 (M§â
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
§gÀĪÀ JgÀqÀÆ
f¯ÉèAiÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ
ªÀÄlÖzÀ UÀȺÀ
¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
- 24 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
6 ªÉÄÃ¯É 1 (M§â
£ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ (1), ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
(2), (3), (4) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
(5) ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹
¨ÁåAQ£À
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ
§gÀĪÀ E¤ßvÀgÉ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
M§â ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
7 ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À 1 (M§â
dAn jf¸ÁÖçgï£ÀÄ. ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
8 PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå 1 (M§â
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ C¥ÉPïì ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
¨ÁåAQ£À £Á«Ä¤
9 ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ £Á«Ä¤ 1 (M§â
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
(d£À
¤zÉÃð±À
PÀgÄÀ )
¸À»/- ¸À»/-
ªÀÄÄRå PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÁðºÀuÁ¢üPÁj (¥Àæ) CzsåÀ PÀëgÄÀ ,
PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯Áè PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ,
r.¹.¹. ¨ÁåAPï ¤., PÉÆïÁgÀ.
- 25 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
"C¸À°UÉ vÀPÀÌ £ÀPÀ®Ä"
¸À»/-
ªÀÄÄRåPÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀðºÀuÁ¢üPÁj (¥Àæ)
¸À»/-
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV,
¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ.
8. The Ai Machine translated version of the said
Resolution is as under:
Annexure-C
Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd.,
Kolar.
Head Office, Kolar.
Post Box Number: 11, D.C.C. Bank Road, Kolar-563101.
On Monday, 06.11.2023, at precisely 11:30 AM, the "Special General Body
Meeting of the Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Co-operative Central Bank
Ltd., Kolar was conducted at the premises of the Central Office of the "Kolar
and Chikkaballapur D.C.C. Bank, Kolar", under the chairmanship of the
honorable President of the bank, Mr. Byalahalli M. Govindagowda. The
extraordinary part of the agenda item number (3) of this special general
meeting is as follows.
Subject: 3: Regarding bringing amendments to the by-laws of Kolar and
Chikkaballapur D.C.C. Bank Ltd., Kolar.
- 26 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Resolution: During the review of the note presented by the bank and the
honorable High Court's order, the representatives of the cooperative
societies present at the meeting provided the following
opinions/suggestions/comments.
- Mr. Hanumegowda, President, Jarabandahalli Agricultural Service
Cooperative Society Ltd., Manchenahalli Taluk, speaking on behalf of the
society, mentioned that the annual general meeting was called on
12.08.2023, wherein the matter of amending the by-laws to allocate 1
director position to Manchenahalli Taluk and 1 director position to Cheluru
Taluk was presented in the meeting. A discussion ensued, and it was
requested to the management board that, as all the district cooperative
central banks in the state are fundamentally based on primary agricultural
credit cooperative societies, priority should first be given to primary
agricultural credit cooperative societies. He mentioned that when he was the
vice-president of the bank, when the government ordered K.G.F. to be the
taluk center, the matter was presented in the annual general meeting, and a
director position for K.G.F. Taluk was allocated. Similarly, after the
government recently declared Manchenahalli and Cheluru as taluk centers
for the past three years, all activities have been ongoing in the respective
taluks, and the fundamental intention is to prioritize the primary agricultural
credit cooperative societies of the district cooperative central bank.
Accordingly, he had requested in the previous annual meeting to allocate 1
director position each to Manchenahalli and Cheluru. When the honorable
president mentioned calling a special general meeting of all members on this
matter, the special general meeting was not called on time. Therefore, when
an application was submitted to the joint registrar of cooperative societies,
Bangalore region, even there, no steps were taken to call the meeting
related to the matter. Understanding that the bank elections are
approaching, Hanumegowda, as the president of Jarabandahalli V.S.S.S.N.,
Manchenahalli Taluk, and Shekhar Chilakanerpu V.S.S.S.N., Cheluru Taluk,
filed separate writ petitions in the Karnataka High Court. After extensive
discussions in the High Court regarding the said writ order, the honorable
Karnataka High Court issued an order, and a copy of the said order is
available with all member cooperative societies, and the order given by the
High Court on the said matter was read in the meeting. The speaker
mentioned that the number of positions is not important, but after a region
is formed as a taluk center, priority should be given to the primary
agricultural credit cooperative societies originating from that taluk, and a
separate director position should be allocated to the newly formed taluk
- 27 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
centers of Manchenahalli and Cheluru. He requested the meeting chairman,
the board of directors, and all members for this allocation.
- Mr. Lakshminarayana Reddy, President, Nandiganahalli V.S.S.S.N.,
Chintamani Taluk, mentioned that in the bank's general meeting on
12.08.2023, we, the representatives of Chintamani Taluk, have stated to
continue the existing director positions without any changes. In the annual
general meeting of all members, the meeting chairman mentioned that a
special general meeting would be called. As a special general meeting was
not called accordingly, it was informed that the representatives of
Manchenahalli and Cheluru Taluks have brought an order from the High
Court, requesting a director position for Cheluru and Manchenahalli Taluks.
When it was mentioned that 23 faxes come to Bagepalli Taluk, 08 faxes to
Gudibande Taluk, and 04 faxes to Cheluru Taluk, all members of Cheluru
Taluk opposed this, stating that Cheluru has 08 faxes. Later, Mr.
Lakshminarayana Reddy spoke, mentioning that for taluks with faxes, 1
director position should be allocated, and initially, 2 director positions should
be allocated to Chintamani Taluk. Otherwise, the faxes in the two districts
should be distributed equally, and a director position should be allocated, or
else 2 director positions should be allocated to Chintamani, as stated in the
meeting.
- Mr. Bhaskar, President, Sugatur S.F.S.C.S., mentioned that the lifeline of
the D.C.C. Bank, the faxes, have been equally distributed with 6 director
positions each for Kolar and Chikkaballapur districts. One director position
has been allocated to M.P.C.S. of Chikkaballapur district, one director
position to M.P.C.S. of Kolar district, and one director position to women's
M.P.C.S. of both districts. He stated that there is no opposition to allocating
a director position to Manchenahalli and Cheluru Taluks, as requested, but
the current director positions in Kolar district should not be altered for any
reason. He mentioned that there is no opposition from us, the
representatives of Kolar district, to making changes in the distribution of the
current 6 positions in Chikkaballapur district.
- A representative from the P.L.D. Bank of Gudibande Taluk spoke, stating
that a separate director position has been requested for Kolar and
Chikkaballapur districts. In the previous general meeting of all bank
members, it was decided to transfer the T.A.P.C.M.S. director position to the
director position of primary agricultural cooperative banks, and requested to
inform the meeting about the current status of the said matter.
- Mr. K.M. Nataraj, representative of Kuruburu S.F.S.C.S., spoke, requesting
a separate director position for Manchenahalli and Cheluru due to
geographical division of the region.
- 28 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
- Mr. Chandrashekhar Reddy, representative of Palayakere V.S.S.S.N.,
Cheluru, mentioned that Cheluru Taluk is adjacent to the Andhra Pradesh
border, and it is 40 km to go to Chintamani and 40 km to go to Bagepalli
Taluk. Since Cheluru has been formed as a separate taluk, he requested a
separate director position for us.
- Mr. R.P. Gopala Gowda, representative of Alakapura M.P.C.S., spoke about
the inclusion of Manchenahalli Taluk in the reorganization of the region,
stating that there is no opposition to this, but in the matter of
reorganization, there is no objection to retaining the Gauribidanur Assembly
constituency while forming the Manchenahalli constituency. He mentioned
that a petition related to this was submitted to the honorable meeting
chairman.
- Mr. Y.B. Ashwathnarayana spoke about the allocation of 1 director position
to Manchenahalli and Cheluru Taluks, mentioning that the High Court has
already given an order, but there is no clarity in the order regarding calling
a special general meeting of all members, and no specific date and time
have been fixed in the order. He mentioned that in 2018, during the
delimitation issue of the Kolar and Chikkaballapur Milk Union, he, as the
then meeting chairman, argued for the equal distribution of milk producer
cooperative societies and filed a case. He emphasized that the primary
agricultural credit cooperative societies integrated into the district
cooperative central bank are present in varying numbers in a taluk and
requested that they be classified equally. He stated that it is not reasonable
to allocate one director position to a taluk with 3 to 4 primary agricultural
credit cooperative societies. Mr. Y.B. Ashwathnarayana further mentioned
that the district central cooperative bank has various types of cooperative
systems, including faxes, M.P.C.S., and housing cooperative societies, and
requested clarity on which of these would be considered for opportunity. He
mainly requested not to make any changes to the milk producers'
cooperative societies.
- Mr. Rajendragowda, representative of Pra.Sa.Kri. & Gra.A. Bank, Mulbagal,
spoke, mentioning that in the previous bank's annual general meeting, a
request for a director position was made for Pra.Sa.Kri. & Gra.A. Banks, and
the honorable meeting chairman mentioned that it is not possible to allocate
a separate position, so it was decided to combine with T.A.P.C.M.S. and
allocate director positions to Pra.Sa.Kri. & Gra.A. Banks of both districts. The
honorable chairman and the chief executive officer requested to inform the
meeting about the progress of the said matter regarding the amendment.
- 29 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
- Mr. Jagannath, representative of Bisalahalli V.S.S.S.N., spoke, mentioning
that the government has created a new taluk with the intention of
developing the area, and permission has already been obtained to open
branches in the two taluks. He opposed the use of the term "unscientific"
used by some representatives during their speeches, stating that it is not
appropriate. He mentioned that the issue was brought up for discussion in
the previous annual meeting, but the discussion was incomplete, and a
special meeting would be called to conduct a thorough discussion and make
a decision. Since the government's intention of creating a new taluk is for
the development of the area, he requested the withdrawal of the use of the
term "unscientific" regarding the said matter. Therefore, he requested the
allocation of a separate director position for Manchenahalli and Cheluru
Taluks.
- Sri Narasimhamurthy, Gauribidanur, Kasaba V.S.S.S.N. The representative
spoke about retaining Kasaba, Hosur, D. Palya, and Nagaregere V.S.S.S.N.s
within Gauribidanur Taluk and expressed opposition to giving any hoblis of
Gauribidanur Taluk to Manchenahalli, while stating that there is no objection
to providing separate faxes to Manchenahalli.
Pra.Sa.Kri. & Gra.A. Bank representative Rajendragowda intervened in the
meeting, stating that the meeting was being led into confusion and that
according to the law on director positions, it should not exceed 18. He
requested the chairman to provide clear information to the meeting about
which category would be included or excluded. In response, the chairman
stated that the inclusion or exclusion of membership categories is subject to
the decision of all members, and the decision of all members is final. The
chairman further informed the meeting about the statistical information of
total faxes in each taluk across the two districts. It was recorded that there
is no confusion regarding the director positions in Kolar district. This issue
has mainly arisen in Chikkaballapur district, particularly concerning
Gauribidanur, Bagepalli, and Chintamani taluks, which encompass
approximately 92 faxes. These 92 faxes are to be included in the upcoming
Manchenahalli and Cheluru taluks, and permission has been obtained from
the RBI to open branches in these taluks. Therefore, the law stipulates 18
director positions, which cannot be exceeded, and the meeting was
requested to provide opinions on how to proceed in Chikkaballapur district,
where 92 faxes are prevalent.
After discussing the above in the meeting, the chairman suggested putting
the amendments to the bylaws to a vote, and all members present indicated
their approval by raising their hands.
- 30 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Bylaws Current Bylaw Amendment to Bylaw Reasons
Numb for
er Amendme
nt
4(1) Share Capital and Membership: Share Capital and As per the
Membership: Membership: order of
Share Capital: Membership: the High
Share Capital: Court
Bank's share capital must consist of
shares with a face value as follows: Bank's share capital must
1. 'A' category shares, each share consist of shares with a face
must be worth Rs.1,00,000.00. value as follows:
1. 'A' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.1,00,000.00.
2. 'B' category shares, each share
must be worth Rs.1,00,000.00.
2. 'B' category shares, each
3. 'C' category shares, each share share must be worth
must be worth Rs.1,00,000.00. Rs.1,00,000.00.
4. 'D' category shares, each share 3. 'C' category shares, each
must be worth Rs.25,000.00. share must be worth
Rs.1,00,000.00.
5. 'E' category shares, each share
must be worth Rs.25,000.00. 4. 'D' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.25,000.00.
6. 'F' category shares, each share
must be worth Rs.1,00,000.00.
5. 'E' category shares, each
share must be worth
7. 'G' category shares, each share Rs.25,000.00.
must be worth Rs.1,00,000.00.
6. 'F' category shares, each
8. 'H' category shares, each share share must be worth
must be worth Rs.1,000.00. Rs.1,00,000.00.
9. 'I' category shares, each share 7. 'G' category shares, each
must be worth Rs.1,00,000.00. share must be worth
10. 'J' category shares, each share Rs.1,000.00.
must be worth Rs.100.00.
8. 'H' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.10,000.00.
- 31 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
9. 'I' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.1,00.00.
Explanation of Share Capital Explanation for Share Capital
Membership: Membership:
1. 'A' Class shares are to be 1. 'A' Class shares are to be
allocated to the Primary Agricultural allocated to Primary Agricultural
Credit Co-operative Societies within Credit Cooperative Societies
the bank's jurisdiction. within the bank's jurisdiction.
2. 'B' Class shares are to be
allocated to the Taluk Agricultural
Produce Marketing Co-operative 2. 'B' Class shares are to be
Societies. allocated to Taluk Agricultural
Produce Marketing Cooperative
Societies and Primary
Cooperative Agricultural and
Rural Development Banks.
3. 'C' Class shares are to be
allocated to Urban Cooperative
3. 'C' Class shares are to be Banks and non-agricultural
allocated to Urban Co-o credit and cooperative societies.
perative Banks and Non-Agricultural
Credit Co-operative Societies.
4. 'D' Class shares are to be
allocated to Milk Producers'
Cooperative Societies (excluding
Women's Milk Producers'
Cooperative Societies).
4. 'D' Class shares are to be
allocated to Milk Producers' Co-
operative Societies (excluding
Women's Milk Producers' Co-
operative Societies).
5. 'E' Class shares are to be
allocated to Women's Milk
Producers' Cooperative Societies
and all other types of Women's
Cooperative Societies.
5. 'E' Class shares are to be
allocated to Women's Milk
Producers' Co-operative Societies.
6. 'F' Class shares are to be
- 32 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
allocated to other cooperative
societies excluding those in
categories 1, 2, 3, and 5 (A, B,
C, D, and E).
7. 'G' Class shares are to be
allocated to other corporate
bodies, including organizations
6. 'F' Class shares are to be eligible under Section 16 of the
allocated to Taluk-level Housing Co- 1959 Act, L.I.C., A.P.M.C., and
operative Societies. local bodies. Members who gain
membership through this
opportunity do not have the
right to participate in
administration or in the general
body meetings.
7. 'G' Class shares are to be
allocated to other Co-operative
8. 'H' Class shares are to be
Societies excluding those in
allocated to the State
categories 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (A,
Government and Karnataka
B, C, D, E, and F).
State Cooperative Apex Bank.
8. 'H' Class shares are to be
allocated to other corporate bodies,
including those eligible under
Section 16 of the Co-operative
Societies Act 1959, such as LIC,
APMC, and local bodies. Members
who obtain membership under this
category do not have the right to
participate in administration or in
the general body meetings.
9. 'I' Class shares are intended
for the bank's associate
membership and nominal
membership, and for individuals,
with the required share amount
9. 'I' Class shares are to be being Rs. 100.00.
allocated to the State Government
and the Karnataka State Co-
operative Apex Bank.
10. 'J' Class shares are meant for
the bank's associate membership
and nominal membership, and for
individuals. The share amount to be
- 33 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
submitted by them is Rs. 100.00.
9(A) Board of Administration: Board of Administration: As per the
order of
The management and direction of The management and direction the High
the bank's operations shall be of the bank's operations shall be Court
vested in a board comprising 21 vested in a board comprising 21
administrative directors, excluding administrative directors,
the Chief Executive Officer, as excluding the Chief Executive
detailed below. Officer, as detailed below.
1 In each taluk 12 ( 1 Directors 14 (
(except Twelve elected from Fourtee
Bangarpet taluk), Member the Primary n
one director shall s Agricultural Member
be elected from Director Credit s
among the s) Cooperative Director
members of the Societies of s)
respective taluk's Kolar Taluk.
primary
agricultural credit 2 Directors
cooperative elected from
societies the Primary
(agricultural Agricultural
service Credit
cooperative Cooperative
societies/agricultu Societies of
ral service Malur Taluk.
cooperative
banks/farmers' 3 Directors
service elected from
cooperative the Primary
banks/service Agricultural
cooperative Credit
societies/farmers' Cooperative
service Societies of
cooperative Bangarapet
societies or any Taluk.
other name by
which they are 4 Directors
called). elected from
the Primary
One director shall Agricultural
be elected from Credit
the remaining Cooperative
part of Bangarpet Societies of
taluk. K.G.F. Taluk.
2 A director shall be 1 5 Directors
elected from all Director elected from
taluk agricultural the Primary
produce Agricultural
marketing Credit
cooperative Cooperative
societies Societies of
- 34 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
(TAPCMS) within Mulabagilu
the jurisdiction of Taluk.
the bank from
both districts. 6 Directors
elected from
3 Two directors 2 the Primary
shall be elected Director Agricultural
from the milk s Credit
producers' Cooperative
cooperative Societies of
societies of the Srinivasapur
respective district Taluk.
(excluding
women's milk 7 Directors
producers' elected from
cooperative the Primary
societies). Agricultural
Credit
4 One director shall 1 Cooperative
be elected from Director Societies of
the women's milk Chintamani
producers' Taluk.
cooperative
societies within 8 Directors
the jurisdiction of elected from
the bank from the Primary
both districts. Agricultural
Credit
5 A director shall be 1 Cooperative
elected from the Director Societies of
taluk-level Shidlaghatta
housing Taluk.
cooperative
societies within 9 Directors
the jurisdiction of elected from
the bank from the Primary
both districts. Agricultural
Credit
6 Apart from the 1 Cooperative
above-mentioned Director Societies of
(1), (2), (3), (4), Chikkaballapu
and (5), one r Taluk.
director shall be
elected from Directors
other cooperative elected from
societies within the Primary
the jurisdiction of Agricultural
the bank. Credit
Cooperative
7 Registrar of 1 Societies of
Cooperative Director Gudibande
Societies. Taluk.
8 Nominee of 1 1 Directors
Karnataka State elected from
- 35 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Cooperative Apex Director the Primary
Bank. Agricultural
Credit
9 Government 1 Cooperative
nominee. Director Societies of
Bagepalli
Total 21 Taluk.
Director
Directors
elected from
the Primary
Agricultural
Credit
Cooperative
Societies of
Gauribidanur
(Hosur,
Kasaba, and
Nagargere
Hoblis).
1 Directors
elected from
the Primary
Agricultural
Credit
Cooperative
Societies of
Cheluru Taluk
(Cheluru and
Chilakanerpu
Hoblis).
1 Directors
elected from
the Primary
Agricultural
Credit
Cooperative
Societies of
Manchenahalli
(Manchenahal
li,
Thondebavi,
and D.Palya
Hoblis).
(Primary
Agricultural
Credit
Societies,
whether
called
Agricultural
Service
- 36 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Cooperative
Society/Farm
ers Service
Cooperative
Society/Servic
e Cooperative
Society or by
any other
name)
elected from Director
the
Agricultural
Produce
Marketing
Cooperative
Societies
(TAPCMS) and
Primary
Cooperative
Agriculture
and Rural
Development
Banks within
the
operational
area of the
bank from
both districts.
3 Two directors 2
elected from Director
the Milk s
Producers
Cooperative
Societies of
the district
(excluding
Women's Milk
Producers
Cooperative).
elected from Director
the Women's
Milk
Producers
Cooperative
Societies and
all other types
of Women's
Cooperative
Societies
within the
- 37 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
operational
area of the
bank from
both districts.
5 One director 1
elected from Director
the other
Cooperative
Societies
within the
operational
area of the
bank,
excluding
those
mentioned
above in (1),
(2), (3), and
(4).
Registrar of Director
Cooperative
Societies.
Government Director
Nominee.
Director
s
Signature/-
Chief Executive Officer (Acting)
Kolar and Chikkaballapur District
DCC Bank Ltd., Kolar.
Signature/-
President,
Kolar and
Chikkaballapur,
- 38 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
DCC Bank Ltd.,
Kolar.
"True Copy"
Signature/-
Chief Executive Officer (Acting)
Signature/-
On behalf of the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Bangalore Region, Bangalore.
9. The DCC Bank claimed to have sent the proposal of
the aforesaid amendment to the Joint Registrar of
Co-operative Societies - 2nd Respondent herein on
7-11-2023. No action had been taken on the same
till February 2024. It is only when the proposed
election was set in motion, that on 20-2-2024, the
JRCS passed an order rejecting the proposed
amendment on the ground that the procedure
adopted in passing the Resolution is not in
accordance with Rule 6 (1) and Rule 6(2) of the KCS
Rules. The order of the JRCS dated 20.02.2024,
- 39 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
which is produced at Annexure-D to the petition, is
reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
ANNEXURE - D
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀgÀPÁgÀ
(¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ E¯ÁSÉ)
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÀ PÀbÃÉ j, ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ.
£ÀA.146, "¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ËzsÀ", 3£Éà ªÀĺÀr, 8£Éà CqÀØgÀ¸ÛÉ, ªÀiÁUÉÆÃð¸À gÀ¸ÛÉ, ªÀįÉèñÀégÀA,
¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ-03.
«µÀAiÀÄB PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ
¨ÁåAPï ¤, PÉÆïÁgÀ EzÀgÀ G¥À «¢üUÀ½UÉ vÀA¢gÀĪÀ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrAiÀÄ£ÀÄß
wgÀ¸ÀÌj¸ÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ.
G¯ÉèÃRB 1. ¨ÁåAPï£À ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÉ ¸ÀASÉåB Pɹr¹¹©/AiÉÆÃ&C/9286/
2023-24 ¢£ÁAPÀB 07.11.2023.
2. F PÀbÉÃjAiÀÄ ¥ÀvæÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ 02.12.2023 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
30.01.2024
3. PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå ¸ÀºÀPÁj C¥ÉPïì ¨ÁåAPï ¤AiÀÄ«ÄvÀ,
¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ EªÀjUÉ PÀ¼ÄÀ »¸À¯ÁzÀ F PÀbÉÃjAiÀÄ ¥ÀvæÀ
¢£ÁAPÀB 16.01.2024.
4. ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå ¸ÀºÀPÁj C¥ÉPïì
¨ÁåAPï ¤AiÀÄ«ÄvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ EªÀgÀ ¥ÀvæÀ ¸ÀASÉåB
ªÀÄÄ.PÁ.¤/DªÀÄAPÁ/£Á.¤/3537/2023-24 ¢£ÁAPÀB
25.01.2024.
5. ¨ÁåAPï£À ¥ÀvæÀ ¸ÀASÉåBPɹr¹¹©/AiÉÆÃ&C/12466/2023-24
- 40 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
¢£ÁAPÀB 07.02.2024.
¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉB-
PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤, CAZÉ ¥ÉnÖUÉ ¸ÀASÉå
11, r¹¹ ¨ÁåAPï gÀ¸ÉÛ, PÉÆïÁgÀ-563101 G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB 4(i) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9(J) UÀ½ÃUÉ
vÀA¢gÀĪÀ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrUÉ C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É PÉÆÃj G¯ÉèÃR (1) gÀ£éÀAiÀÄ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
G¯ÉèÃR (2) gÀ ¥ÀvÀæUÀ¼À°è ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÉ ¸ÀA§AzsÀ zÁR¯Áw / ªÀiÁ»wUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ¸À°è¸À®Ä ¸ÀAWÀPÉÌ
¸ÀÆa¸À¯ÁVzÀÄÝ, G¯ÉèÃR (5) gÀ£éÀAiÀÄ ¸ÀAWÀªÅÀ zÁR¯Áw / ªÀiÁ»w ¸À°è¹gÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
¢£ÁAPÀB 06.11.2023 gÀAzÀÄ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨És £Àqɹ, ¨ÁåAPï£À G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB
4(i) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9(J) UÀ½UÉ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr vÀgÀ®Ä ¤tð¬Ä¹, ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ G¥À«¢ü C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É PÉÆÃj
F PÀbÉÃjUÉ ¸À°è¸À¯ÁzÀ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯ÁV, ¢£ÁAPÀB 25.10.2023 gÀAzÀÄ
¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ªÀĺÁ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ C¢üªÉñÀ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ¢B 06.11.2023 gÀ
¸ÉÆêÀĪÁgÀzÀAzÀÄ ¨É½UÉÎ 11.30 UÀAmÉUÉ ¨ÁåAPï£À PÉÃAzÀæ PÀbÉÃjAiÀÄ DªÀgÀtzÀ°è ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¹,
£ÉÆÃnÃ¸ï ¤ÃrgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. DzÀgÉ ¸ÀzÀj £ÉÆÃnøï£À°è ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦¸À¯ÁVgÀĪÀ G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉå 4(i)
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9(J) UÀ¼À°è ºÁ° G¥À«¢üAiÀÄ CªÀPÁ±ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß w½¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. £ÀAvÀgÀ G¥À¤AiÀĪÀÄ
wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrAiÀiÁzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀzÀ CA±ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ºÁUÀÆ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrUÉ PÁgÀtUÀ¼ÄÀ JAzÀÄ F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ
«µÀAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
G¥À G¥À¤AiÀĪÀÄ ºÁ° EzÀÝAvÉ G¥À¤AiÀĪÀÄ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr DzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrUÉ
¤AiÀĪÀÄ PÁgÀtUÀ¼ÄÀ
¸ÀASÉå
4(i) ¥Á®Ä §AqÀªÁ¼À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀéB ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÒ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ WRIT GZÀÒ
PETITION NO.19414/2023 (CS- £ÁåAiÀiÁ®
¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀéB
RES) C/W WRIT PETITION
AiÀÄzÀ
¥Á®Ä §AqÀªÁ¼ÀB 19741/2023 (CS-RES) UÀ¼À
DzÉñÁ
DzÉñÀzÀAvÉ PÀæªÄÀ «qÀ¨ÉÃPÁVzÀÄÝ,
¨ÁåAQ£À µÉÃgÀÄ §AqÀªÁ¼ÀªÀÅ PɼÀV£ÀAvÉ ªÀÄÄR wêÀiÁð£ÀPÁÌV «µÀAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ¸À¨ÉsUÉ £ÀĸÁgÀ.
¨É¯ÉAiÀÄļÀî µÉÃgÀÄUÀ½AzÀ PÀÆrzÀgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ, ªÀÄAr¹zÉ.
1. 'J' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
2. '©' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
- 41 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
3. '¹' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
4. 'r' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
gÀÆ.25,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
5. 'E' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
gÀÆ.25,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
6. 'J¥sï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
7. 'f' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
gÀÆ.1,00,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
8. 'ºÉZï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
gÀÆ.1,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
9. 'L' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
gÀÆ.10,000.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
10. 'eÉ' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæwAiÉÆAzÀÄ µÉÃjUÉ
gÀÆ.100.00 EgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
ªÉÄð£À ¥Á®Ä §AqÀªÁ¼À ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀéPÉÌ «ªÀgÀuÉB
1. J' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¨ÁåAQ£À ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è£À
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ
ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
2. '©' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ PÀȶ
GvÀà£Àß ªÀiÁgÁl ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ
ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
3. '¹' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀlÖt ¸ÀºÀPÁj
¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ½UÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀȶAiÉÄÃvÀgÀ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
4. 'r' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
- 42 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
5. 'E' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ
ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
6. 'J¥sï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ ªÀÄlÖzÀ
UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ
ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
7. 'f' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
6£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ (J.©.¹.r.E ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J¥sï)
ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ EvÀgÉ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
8. 'ºÉZï' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À
PÁAiÉÄÝ 1959gÀ PÀ®A 16 gÀrAiÀÄ°è CºÀðvÉ EgÀĪÀ
¸ÀAWÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÉÃjzÀAvÉ EvÀgÉ PÁ¥ÉÆÃðgÉÃmï
¨ÁrUÀ¼ÀÄ, J¯ï.L.¹., J.¦.JA.¹. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
¸ÀܽÃAiÀÄ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ½UÉ ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. F
CªÀPÁ±ÀzÀ°è ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé ¥ÀqÉzÀ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ½UÉ
DqÀ½vÀzÀ°è, ¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ°è ¨sÁUÀªÀ»¸ÀĪÀ
ºÀPÀÄÌ EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è.
9. 'L' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß gÁdå ¸ÀPÁðgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå ¸ÀºÀPÁj C¥ÉPïì ¨ÁåAQUÉ
¤ÃqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
10. 'eÉ' ªÀUÀðzÀ µÉÃgÀÄ ¨ÁåAQ£À ¸ÀºÀ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÁªÀĪÀiÁvÀæ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåvÀé ºÁUÀÆ ªÀåQÛUÀ½UÉ
ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀvÀPÀÌzÁÝVzÀÄÝ, EªÀgÀÄ ¸À°è¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀ
µÉÃgÀÄ ºÀt gÀÆ.100.00 UÀ¼ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
9(J) DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½B DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½B GZÀÒ
£ÁåAiÀiÁ®
¨ÁåAQ£À PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀðºÀuÉAiÀÄ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥À£É ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¨ÁåAQ£À PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀðºÀuÉAiÀÄ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥À£É
¤zÉÃð±À£ÀªÀÅ PɼÀV£ÀAvÉ ªÀÄÄRå ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤zÉÃð±À£ÀªÀÅ PɼÀV£ÀAvÉ ªÀÄÄRå AiÀÄzÀ
PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÁðºÀPÀ£À£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ 21 PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀðºÀuÁ¢üPÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß DzÉñÁ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ£ÉÆß¼ÀUÉÆAqÀ DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹ 21
- 43 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
¤»vÀªÁVgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ£ÉÆß¼ÀUÉÆAqÀ DqÀ½vÀ £ÀĸÁgÀ.
ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è ¤»vÀªÁVgÀÄvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.
1 ¥Àæw vÁ®ÆèQ£À 12 (ºÀ£ÉßgÀqÀÄ
(§AUÁgÀ¥ÉÃmÉ d£À
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ)
ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹) 1 ¥Àæw vÁ®ÆèQ£À 12
M§âgÀAvÉ (ºÀ£ÉßgÀqÄÀ
M§âgÀAvÉ
DAiÀiÁAiÀiÁ DAiÀiÁAiÀiÁ d£À
vÁ®ÆèQ£À vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ Ä)
¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÀÄ
(ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ (ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ
¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ /
ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ
¸ÀAWÀ /
ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¨ÁåAPï /
¸ÉêÁ ¨ÁåAPÀÄ gÉÊvÀgÀ ¸ÉêÁ
/ gÉÊvÀgÀ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¨ÁåAPïUÀ¼ÀÄ /
¨ÁåAPÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ / ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ / gÉÊvÀgÀ
¸ÀAWÀ / gÉÊvÀgÀ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀ CxÀªÁ
¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀ CxÀªÁ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÃ
AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ºÉ¸Àj¤AzÀ
ºÉ¸Àj¤AzÀ PÀgÉAiÀÄ®àqÀĪÀ
PÀgÉAiÀÄ®àqÀĪÀ ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ
¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄ)
vÀªÉÆä¼ÀVAzÀ
¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄ)
vÀªÉÆä¼ÀVAzÀ ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ
ªÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ 2 DAiÀiÁ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ 2 (JgÀqÄÀ
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ d£À
§AUÁgÀ¥ÉÃmÉ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ
vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ Ä)
PÉ.f.J¥sï. ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ
«zsÁ£À¸À¨sÁPÉëÃvÀæ E§âgÀÄ
¢AzÀ
- 44 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ
ªÀ M§â (ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
§AUÁgÀ¥ÉÃmÉ ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹.)
vÁ®ÆèQ£À
G½zÀ
¨sÁUÀ¢AzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀB 12.08.2023 gÀAzÀÄ £ÀqÉzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀÄ ªÁ¶ð ªÀĺÁ ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ°è ªÉÄîÌAqÀ
ªÀ M§â ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß AiÀÄxÁªÀvÁÛV
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgɸÀ®Ä ¤tð¬Ä¹gÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ
2 ¨ÁåAQ£À 1 (M§â ZÀZÉðUÉ CªÀPÁ±À«gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. G½zÀAvÉ
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ) ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉUÉ
§gÀĪÀ JgÀqÀÆ ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
f¯ÉèAiÀÄ J¯Áè
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ PÀȶ
GvÀà£Àß ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÒ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ WRIT
ªÀiÁgÁl PETITION NO.19414/2023 (CS-
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ RES) C/W WRIT PETITION
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ 19741/2023 (CS-RES) UÀ¼À
(TAPCMS) DzÉñÀzÀAvÉ PÀæªÀÄ«qÀ¨ÉÃPÁVzÀÄÝ,
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀÄ wêÀiÁð£ÀPÁÌV «µÀAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ¸À¨ÉsUÉ
ªÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ. ªÀÄAr¹zÉ.
3 DAiÀiÁ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ 2 (JgÀqÀÄ d£À
ºÁ®Ä ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ)
GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀÄ
ªÀ E§âgÀÄ
¤zÉñÀPÀgÀÄ
(ºÁ®Ä
GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
ªÀÄ»¼Á
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹)
- 45 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
4 ¨ÁåAQ£À 1 (M§â
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ ¤zÉñÀQ)
§gÀĪÀ JgÀqÀÆ
f¯ÉèAiÀÄ ºÁ®Ä
GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
ªÀÄ»¼Á
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀÄ
ªÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
5 ¨ÁåAQ£À 1 (M§â
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
§gÀĪÀ JgÀqÀÆ
f¯ÉèAiÀÄ
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ
ªÀÄlÖzÀ UÀȺÀ
¤ªÀiÁðt
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀÄ
ªÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
6 ªÉÄïï 1 (M§â
£ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
(1), (2), (3),
(4) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ (5)
ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹
¨ÁåAQ£À
PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛUÉ
§gÀĪÀ E¤ßvÀgÉ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀÄ
ªÀ M§â
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
7 ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ 1
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn (M§â
jf¸ÁÖçgï£ÀÄ. ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
- 46 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
8 PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå 1
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ C¥ÉPïì (M§â
¨ÁåAQ£À ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
£Á«Ä¤
9 ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ 1 (M§â
£Á«Ä¤ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ)
(d£À
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÄÀ )
DzÀgÉ 3£Éà PÁ®A£À°è G¥À¤AiÀĪÀÄzÀ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrAiÀiÁzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀzÀ G¥À«¢üAiÀÄ
CªÀPÁ±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ UÀªÄÀ £ÀPÌÉ ¸ÁzÀgÀ¥Àr¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. F PÁ®A£À°è ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÒ
£ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ WRIT PETITION NO.19414/2023 (CS-RES) C/W WRIT
PETITION 19741/2023 (CS-RES) UÀ¼À DzÉñÀzÀAvÉ PÀæªÄÀ «qÀ¨ÉÃPÁVzÀÄÝ, wêÀiÁð£ÀPÁÌV
«µÀAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ¸À¨sÉUÉ ªÀÄAr¹zÉ JAzÀÄ £ÀªÄÀ Æ¢¹¯ÁVzÉ. DzÀgÉ ªÉÄð£À UË| GZÀÒ
£ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ DzÉñÀªÀÅ ¸ÀzÀj ¨ÁåAQUÉ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÀªÀð ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀÄ®Ä
¤ÃrzÀAvÀºÀ ¤zÉÃð±À£ÀªÁVzÀÄÝ, ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ G¥À«¢ü wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrAiÀÄ £ÀAvÀgÀzÀ CªÀPÁ±ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ
AiÀiÁªÀŪÀÅ JAzÀÄ J¯Áè ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ jUÉ w½¸ÀvÀPÌÀ dªÁ¨ÁÝjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¨ÁåAPï ¤ªÀð»¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ G¥À«¢üAiÀÄ ¥ÁgÀzÀ±ÀðPÀªÁVgÀzÉà J¯Áè ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ UÀªÄÀ £ÀPÌÉ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ G¥À«¢üAiÀÄ
CA±ÀUÀ¼À ªÉÄÃ¯É ZÀZÉðAiÀiÁUÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ªÀiÁ»w E®è¢gÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÄÀ ß UÀªÄÀ ¤¹zÉ. ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgÉzÀÄ
wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrUÉ PÁgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀºÁ GZÀÒ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ DzÉñÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ JAzÀÄ £ÀªÄÀ Æ¢¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
UË| GZÀÒ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀĪÀÅ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀÄ®Ä DzÉògÀÄvÀÛzÉ «£ÀB
G¥À¤AiÀĪÀÄ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrAiÀiÁzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀzÀ CA±À ºÁUÀÆ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrUÉ PÁgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. UË| GZÀÒ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ DzÉñÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ¸ÀªÄÀ AiÉÆÃavÀªÁV ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ UÀªÄÀ £ÀPÉÌ
vÀgÀzÉà UË¥ÀåªÁVnÖgÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß UÀªÄÀ ¤¹zÉ.
¢£ÁAPÀB 25.10.2023 gÀ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ £ÉÆÃn¸ï£À°è G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉå
9(J) gÀ°è 21 d£À DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ PÉëÃvÀæªÁgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÁgÀÄ ºÀAaPÉ
¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ°è UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ ¥Àæw¤¢ü¸À®àqÄÀ wÛzÝÀ 1 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À
ºÁUÀÆ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå C¥ÉPïì ¨ÁåAPï ¤AiÀÄ«ÄvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ À gÀÄ EzÀgÀ £Á«Ä¤ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ
¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß vÉUÉzÀĺÁPÀĪÀ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £ÉÆÃn¸ï£À°è ¥ÀƪÀð¨sÁ«AiÀiÁV J®è
¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ UÀªÀÄ£ÀPÉÌ vÀgÀzÉà ¢£ÁAPÀB 06.11.2023 gÀ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ «µÀAiÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå 03
- 47 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
gÀ°è ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦¹ ¤tð¬Ä¹gÀĪÀÅzÀÄ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÄÀ 1960 ¤AiÀĪÀÄ
6(2) gÀ G®èAWÀ£ÉAiÀiÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgÉzÀÄ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ G¥À«¢üUÀ¼À §UÉÎ dgÀ§AqÀºÀ½î ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀzÀ CzsÀåPÀëgÁzÀ ²æà ºÀ£ÄÀ ªÉÄÃUËqÀ, £ÀA¢UÁ£ÀºÀ½î «J¸ïJ¸ïJ¸ïJ£ï CzsåÀ PÀëgÁzÀ ²æÃ
®QëöäãÁgÁAiÀÄtgÉrØ, ¸ÀÄUÀlÆgÀÄ J¸ïJ¥sïJ¸ï¹J¸ï CzsÀåPÀëgÁzÀ ²æà ¨sÁ¸ÀÌgï, UÀGr§AqÉ
vÁ®ÆèQ£À ¦.J¯ï.r. ¨ÁåAQ£À ¥Àæw¤¢ü, PÀÄgÀħÆgÀÄ J¸ïJ¥sïJ¸ï¹J¸ï ¥Àæw¤¢üAiÀiÁzÀ ²æÃ
PÉ.JA. £ÀlgÁeï, ¥Á¼ÀåPÀgÉUÉ «J¸ïJ¸ïJ¸ïJ£ï ¥Àæw¤¢üAiÀiÁzÀ ²æà ZÀAzÀæ±ÉÃRgïgÉrØ,
C®PÁ¥ÀÄgÀ «J¸ïJ¸ïJ¸ïJ£ï ¥Àæw¤¢üAiÀiÁzÀ ²æà Dgï.¦. UÉÆÃ¥Á®UËqÀ, ¥Áæ.¸À.PÀÈ.&UÁæ.C.
¨ÁåAPï ªÀÄļÀ¨ÁV®Ä ¥Àæw¤¢üAiÀiÁzÀ gÁeÉÃAzÀæUËqÀ, ©¸À®ºÀ½î «J¸ïJ¸ïJ¸ïJ£ï
¥Àæw¤¢üAiÀiÁzÀ ²æà dUÀ£ï£Áxï, UËj©zÀ£Æ À gÀÄ PÀ¸À¨Á «.J¸ï.J¸ï.J¸ïæ.J£ï. ¥Àæw¤¢üAiÀiÁzÀ
²æà £ÀgÀ¹AºÀªÀÄÆwð EªÀgÀÄUÀ¼ÄÀ ªÀiÁvÀ£Ár vÀPÀgÁgÀÄ / C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ / ªÀÄ£À«UÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß w½¹gÀĪÀ
§UÉÎ £ÀqÀªÀ½ zÁR¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
F CA±ÀUÀ½UÉ ¸À¨sÁzsåÀ PÀëgÄÀ G¥À«¢üUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß wzÀÄÝ¥Àr ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ªÀÄvÀPÌÉ ºÁPÀ®Ä
¸ÀÆa¹zÁUÀ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ºÁdjzÀÝ J¯Áè ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀÄ PÉÊ ªÉÄÃ¯É JvÀÄÛªÅÀ zÀgÀ ªÀÄÆ®PÀ vÀªÀÄä
M¦àUÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀÆa¹zÀgÀÄ JAzÀÄ £ÀqÀªÀ½ zÁR¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ DzÀgÉ ¸À¨sÁzsåÀ PÀëgÀ ¸ÀÆZÀ£É ºÁUÀÆ
J¯Áè ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄ PÉÊ ªÉÄÃ¯É JvÀÄÛªÅÀ zÀgÀ ªÀÄÆ®PÀ vÀªÄÀ ä M¦àUÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀÆa¹gÀĪÀAvÉ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ
G¥À«¢ü «µÀAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄvÀPÌÉ ºÁQ ¤tð¬Ä¹gÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¢£ÁAPÀB 06.11.2023 gÀAzÀÄ
£ÀqɹgÀĪÀ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ £ÀqÀªÀ½UÀ¼À°è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼ÄÀ EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è. CAzÀgÉ
¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ G¥À«¢üAiÀÄÄ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 6(1) gÀ CªÀPÁ±ÀzÀAvÉ ªÀÄÆgÀ£Éà JgÀqÄÀ §ºÀĪÀÄvÀ¢AzÀ
CAVÃPÁgÀ DVgÀÄvÀÛzÉA§ §UÉÎ ªÀiÁ»w EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è.
¨ÁåAQUÉ ºÉaÑ£À ªÀÄlÖzÀ°è ºÀtPÁ¸ÀÄ £ÉgÀªÅÀ (¸Á®) ¤ÃqÀĪÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀiÁV ºÁUÀÆ 3
ºÀAvÀzÀ PÀȶ ºÀtPÁ¸ÀÄ ªÀåªÀ¸ÜÉ AiÀÄ ¥ÀæªÄÀ ÄR ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÆzÀ® WÀlÖzÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀiÁV PÁAiÀÄð
¤ªÀð»¸ÀĪÀ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå C¥ÉPïì ¨ÁåAPï ¤AiÀÄ«ÄvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ À gÀÄ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ
G¥À«¢üAiÀÄ°è £Á«Ä¤ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À PÉÊ©nÖgÄÀ ªÀ §UÉÎ G¯ÉèÃR(4) gÀ ¥ÀvæÀzÀ°è ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå ¸ÀºÀPÁj C¥ÉPïì ¨ÁåAPï ¤AiÀÄ«ÄvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ À gÀÄ EªÀgÀÄ
"PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄ 1959 ¥ÀÌgÀt 28-J(1), ¥ÀæPÀgÀt 2 (J¥sï-3)
ºÁUÀÆ 28-J(2)(ii)(©) gÀAvÉ ¨ÁåAQ¤AzÀ M§âgÀ£ÄÀ ß £ÁªÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±À£À ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä
CªÀPÁ±À«gÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè PÉÃAzÀæ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¨ÁåAQ£ÀªÀgÀÄ
G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB9(J) PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrUÉ C¥ÉPïì ¨ÁåAQ£À DPÉëÃ¥ÀuÉ EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ JAzÀÄ vÀªÀÄä
CªÀUÁºÀ£ÉUÉ vÀgÀ§AiÀĸÀÄvÉÛãÉ" JAzÀÄ vÀPÀgÁgÀÄ ªÀåPÀÛ¥Àr¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ
f¯Áè PÉÃAzÀæ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¨ÁåAQ£À ºÀtPÁ¸ÀÄ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀiÁzÀ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå C¥ÉPïì ¨ÁåAPï
¤AiÀÄ«ÄvÀ, EªÀgÀ vÀPÀgÁgÀÄ ¥ÀjUÀt¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀAvÀºÀ CA±ÀªÁVzÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀj ¨ÁåAQUÉ C¥ÉPïì
¨ÁåAQ¤AzÀ ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁUÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ ¸Á®¸Ë®¨såÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀ¸Æ À ¯Áw ¥ÀæQæAiÉÄAiÀÄ DUÀĺÉÆÃUÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
ºÁUÀÆ ºÀtPÁ¸ÀÄ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ »vÀ PÁ¥ÁqÀĪÀ CªÀ±åÀ PÀvÉ PÀAqÀÄ §A¢gÀĪÀ »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
- 48 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÄÀ 1960 ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 6(1) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 6(2) gÀ
¥Á®£ÉAiÀiÁUÀ¢gÀĪÀ »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ
DzÉò¸À¯ÁVzÉ.
-: DzÉñÀ :-
¸ÀASÉåB eÉ.Dgï.©./wzÀÄÝ¥Àr-2/26/2023-24 ¢£ÁAPÀB 20.02.2024
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À (wzÀÄÝ¥Àr) C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄ 2012gÀ 12 £Éà PÀ®«Ä£À
G¥ÀPÀ®A 2gÀ ªÉÄÃgÉUÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢ü¸Æ À ZÀ£É ¸ÀASÉåB ¸ÀASÉåB¹MB71B¹J¯ïJAB2016
¢£ÁAPÀB 06.12.2016 gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ zÀvÛÀªÁVgÀĪÀ C¢üPÁgÀªÀ£ÀÄß ZÀ¯Á¬Ä¸ÀÄvÁÛ C±ÀévÜÀ £ÁgÁAiÀÄt,
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÄÀ , ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ À gÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ À gÀÄ DzÀ £Á£ÀÄ
¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ°è «ªÀj¹gÀĪÀ PÁgÀtUÀ½AzÁUÀ ºÁUÀÆ PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤., CAZÉ ¥ÉnÖUÉ ¸ÀASÉå 11, r¹¹ ¨ÁåAPï gÀ¸ÛÉ, PÉÆïÁgÀ-563101
EzÀgÀ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀÄĪÀ°è ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÀEtðAiÀÄ PÉÊUÉƼÀÄîªÀ°è PÀ£ÁðlPÀ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÄÀ 1960gÀ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 6(1) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 6(2)gÀ CªÀPÁ±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
¥Á®£É ªÀiÁqÀ¢gÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ, ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦vÀ G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB 4(i) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9(J) UÀ¼À wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrAiÀÄ£ÀÄß
wgÀ¸ÀÌj¸À¯ÁVzÉ.
F DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¸Àé¸À» ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀbÉÃjAiÀÄ ªÀÄÄzÉæAiÉÆA¢UÉ ¢£ÁAPÀB 20.02.2024 gÀAzÀÄ
ºÉÆgÀr¸À¯ÁVzÉ.
¸À»/-
(C±ÀévÜÀ £ÁgÁAiÀÄt)
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÄÀ ,
¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ.
UÉ,
ªÀÄÄRå PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÁðºÀPÀgÄÀ ,
PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯Áè
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤,
CAZÉ ¥ÉnÖUÉ ¸ÀASÉå 11, r¹¹ ¨ÁåAPï gÀ¸ÛÉ,
- 49 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
PÉÆïÁgÀ - 563101.
¥Àæw ªÀiÁ»wUÁVB-
1) ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À G¥À¤§AzsÀPÀgÄÀ , PÉÆïÁgÀ f¯Éè, PÉÆïÁgÀ gÀªÀjUÉ.
2) ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ ¤§AzsÀPÀgÀÄ, PÉÆïÁgÀ G¥À«¨sÁUÀ gÀªÀjUÉ.
¸À»/-
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV,
¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ.
gÀªÁ¤zÀ ¢£ÁAPÀB 21.02.2014
¥ÀæwUÀ¼À ¸ÀASÉå B 3 ¥ÀæwUÀ¼ÄÀ .
10. The Ai Machine translated version of the said order is
as under:
ANNEXURE - D
Government of Karnataka
(Cooperation Department)
Office of the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Bangalore
Region, Bangalore.
No.146, "Sahakara Soudha", 3rd Floor, 8th Cross Road, Margosa Road,
Malleshwaram, Bangalore-03.
Subject: Regarding the rejection of the amendment brought to the bylaws
of Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Kolar.
- 50 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
References:
1. Bank's Proposal Number: KCDCCB/Y&A/9286/2023-24 Dated:
07.11.2023.
2. This office's letter dated 02.12.2023 and 30.01.2024.
3. Letter sent to Karnataka State Cooperative Apex Bank Limited, Bangalore
from this office Dated: 16.01.2024.
4. Managing Director, Karnataka State Cooperative Apex Bank Limited,
Bangalore, their letter number: Mu.Ka.Ni/Aamanka/Na.Ni/3537/2023-24
dated: 25.01.2024.
5. Bank's letter number KCDCCB/Y&A/12466/2023-24 Dated: 07.02.2024.
Preamble:
The proposal was submitted under reference (1) seeking approval for the
amendment to bylaws number 4(i) and 9(a) of Kolar and Chikkaballapur
District Cooperative Central Bank, Post Box Number 11, DCC Bank Road,
Kolar-563101. As per the letters in reference (2), the society was instructed
to submit records/information related to the proposal, which was submitted
by the society as per reference (5).
On the date 06.11.2023, a special general meeting was conducted, and it
was resolved to amend the bank's by-law numbers 4(i) and 9(a). The
proposed by-law amendment was submitted to this office for approval, and
upon review of the proposal, on 25.10.2023 a special general assembly
session of all members was scheduled for Monday, 06.11.2023, at 11:30 AM
in the premises of the bank's central office, and a notice was issued.
However, the notice mentions the current provisions of by-law numbers 4(i)
and 9(a). Subsequently, the content after the by-law amendment and the
reasons for the amendment are presented as follows.
Byla Current Bylaw Amendment to Bylaw Reason
ws s for
Num Amend
ber ment
4(i) Share Capital and Honorable High Court's As per
Membership: WRIT PETITION the
Membership: NO.19414/2023 (CS-RES) order of
Share Capital: C/W WRIT PETITION the
19741/2023 (CS-RES). As High
Bank's share capital must per the order, action needs Court
consist of shares with a to be taken, and the matter
face value as follows:
- 51 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
1. 'A' category shares, each has been placed before the
share must be worth meeting for a decision.
Rs.1,00,000.00.
2. 'B' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.1,00,000.00.
3. 'C' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.1,00,000.00.
4. 'D' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.25,000.00.
5. 'E' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.25,000.00.
6. 'F' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.1,00,000.00.
7. 'G' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.1,00,000.00.
8. 'H' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.1,000.00.
9. 'I' category shares, each
share must be worth
Rs.10,000.00.
10. 'J' category shares,
each share must be worth
Rs.100.00.
Explanation of Share
Capital Membership:
1. 'A' Class shares are to be
allocated to the Primary
Agricultural Credit Co-
operative Societies within
the bank's jurisdiction.
2. 'B' Class shares are to be
allocated to the Taluk
Agricultural Produce
- 52 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Marketing Co-operative
Societies.
3. 'C' Class shares are to be
allocated to Urban Co-
operative Banks and Non-
Agricultural Credit Co-
operative Societies.
4. 'D' Class shares are to
be allocated to Milk
Producers' Co-operative
Societies (excluding
Women's Milk Producers'
Co-operative Societies).
5. 'E' Class shares are to be
allocated to Women's Milk
Producers' Co-operative
Societies.
6. 'F' Class shares are to be
allocated to Taluk-level
Housing Co-operative
Societies.
7. 'G' Class shares are to
be allocated to other Co-
operative Societies
excluding those in
categories 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
and 6 (A, B, C, D, E, and
F).
8. 'H' Class shares are to
be allocated to other
corporate bodies, including
those eligible under Section
16 of the Co-operative
Societies Act 1959, such as
LIC, APMC, and local
bodies. Members who
obtain membership under
this category do not have
the right to participate in
- 53 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
administration or in the
general body meetings.
9. 'I' Class shares are to be
allocated to the State
Government and the
Karnataka State Co-
operative Apex Bank.
10. 'J' Class shares are
meant for the bank's
associate membership and
nominal membership, and
for individuals. The share
amount to be submitted by
them is Rs. 100.00.
9(A) Board of Administration: Board of Administration: As per
the
The management and The management and order of
direction of the bank's direction of the bank's the
operations shall be vested operations shall be vested High
in a board comprising 21 in a board comprising 21 Court
administrative directors, administrative directors,
excluding the Chief excluding the Chief
Executive Officer, as Executive Officer, as
detailed below. detailed below.
1 In each taluk 12 (
one director Twelv
1 In each taluk 12 ( shall be e
(except Twelv elected from Memb
Bangarpet e among the ers
taluk), one Memb members of Direct
director shall ers the ors)
be elected Direct respective
from among ors) taluk's
the members primary
of the agricultural
respective credit
taluk's cooperative
primary societies
agricultural (agricultural
credit
- 54 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
cooperative service
societies cooperative
(agricultural societies/agri
service cultural
cooperative service
societies/agri cooperative
cultural banks/farmer
service s' service
cooperative cooperative
banks/farmer banks/service
s' service cooperative
cooperative societies/far
banks/service mers' service
cooperative cooperative
societies/far societies or
mers' service any other
cooperative name by
societies or which they
any other are called).
name by
which they One director
are called). shall be
elected.
One director
shall be 2 Two directors 2
elected from shall be Direct
the remaining elected from ors
part of the milk
Bangarpet producers'
taluk. cooperative
societies of
the
respective
2 A director 1 district
shall be Direct (excluding
elected from or women's milk
all taluk producers'
agricultural cooperative
produce societies).
marketing
cooperative In the annual general
societies meeting held on
(TAPCMS) 12.08.2023
within the Since it has been decided
to continue the above
- 55 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
jurisdiction of director positions as they
the bank are, there is no opportunity
from both for discussion. Otherwise,
districts. changes need to be made
to the director positions.
3 Two directors 2 As per the order of the
shall be Direct Honorable High Court's
elected from ors WRIT PETITION
the milk NO.19414/2023 (CS-RES)
producers' C/W WRIT PETITION
cooperative 19741/2023 (CS-RES),
societies of action needs to be taken,
the and the matter has been
respective presented to the assembly
district for decision.
(excluding
women's milk
producers'
cooperative
societies).
4 One director 1
shall be Direct
elected from or
the women's
milk
producers'
cooperative
societies
within the
jurisdiction of
the bank
from both
districts.
5 A director 1
shall be Direct
elected from or
the taluk-
level housing
cooperative
societies
within the
jurisdiction of
- 56 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
the bank
from both
districts.
6 Apart from 1
the above- Direct
mentioned or
(1), (2), (3),
(4), and (5),
one director
shall be
elected from
other
cooperative
societies
within the
jurisdiction of
the bank.
7 Registrar of 1
Cooperative Direct
Societies. or
8 Nominee of 1
Karnataka Direct
State or
Cooperative
Apex Bank.
9 Government 1
nominee. Direct
or
Direct
ors
However, the opportunities of the sub-bylaw after the amendment in the 3rd
column have not been presented to the members' attention. In this column,
it is noted that action needs to be taken as per the order of the Honorable
High Court's WRIT PETITION NO.19414/2023 (CS-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION
19741/2023 (CS-RES), and the matter has been presented to the assembly
for decision. However, the above-mentioned order of the Honorable High
Court is a directive given to the said bank to convene a special general
- 57 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
meeting of all members, and the bank has not fulfilled the responsibility of
informing all members about the opportunities after the proposed sub-bylaw
amendment, and it is noted that there is no information about the
discussion on the elements of the proposed sub-bylaw transparently to all
members. It is further noted that the reasons for the amendment are also
stated as per the order of the Honorable High Court. The Honorable High
Court orders to convene a special general meeting of all members but does
not mention the elements after the sub-bylaw amendment and the reasons
for the amendment. It is noted that the order of the Honorable High Court
has not been timely brought to the attention of the members and has been
kept confidential.
In the notice of the special general meeting dated 25.10.2023, there is no
prior proposal to bring to the attention of all members the removal of the
position of 1 director representing housing cooperative societies and the
nominee director position of Karnataka State Apex Bank Limited, Bangalore
in the allocation of 21 board of directors by field and position in sub-bylaw
number 9(a). It is decided in subject number 03 of the special general
meeting dated 06.11.2023 without bringing it to the notice of all members,
which is a violation of Rule 6(2) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies
Rules, 1960.
Continuing on the proposed sub-rules, the President of the Jarabandahalli
Agricultural Service Cooperative Society, Mr. Hanumegowda, the President
of Nandiganahalli VSSSN, Mr. Lakshminarayanareddy, the President of
Sugatoor SFSCS, Mr. Bhaskar, the representative of the P.L.D. Bank of
Gaudibande Taluk, Mr. K.M. Nataraj, the representative of Palayakere
VSSSAN, Mr. Chandrashekharareddy, the representative of Alakapura
VSSSN, Mr. R.P. Gopalgowda, the representative of the Primary Agricultural
and Rural Development Bank, Mulbagal, Mr. Rajendragowda, the
representative of Bisalahalli VSSSN, Mr. Jagannath, and the representative
of Gauribidanur Kasaba V.S.S.S.N., Mr. Narasimhammurthy, have spoken
and recorded their disputes/opinions/petitions.
When the chairman of the meeting instructed to put these elements to vote
for amending the sub-bylaws, all members present in the meeting indicated
their consent by raising their hands, as recorded. However, there is no
record in the proceedings of the special general meeting held on 06.11.2023
that the proposed sub-bylaw matter was put to vote and decided as per the
chairman's instruction and the members' consent by raising their hands.
- 58 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
That is, there is no information that the proposed sub-bylaw has been
approved by a two-thirds majority as per the opportunity of Rule 6(1).
The Karnataka State Apex Bank Limited, Bangalore, which functions as a
major financial support (loan) providing institution to the bank and as a key
and first-tier institution in the three-tier agricultural finance system, has
expressed its objection to the proposed sub-bylaw regarding the
relinquishment of the nominee director position. In letter (4), the Managing
Director of Karnataka State Cooperative Apex Bank Limited, Bangalore, has
expressed a dispute stating, "As per Section 28-A(1), Clause 2(f-3) and 28-
A(2)(ii)(b) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959, there is a
provision for nominating one person from the bank, hence the Apex Bank
has an objection to the amendment sought by Kolar and Chikkaballapur
District Cooperative Central Bank in sub-bylaw number 9(a)." The objection
from Karnataka State Apex Bank Limited, which is a financial institution of
Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank, is a matter that
needs consideration, given the necessity to protect the interests of the
financial institution and the implications of the loans and recovery process
provided by the Apex Bank to the said bank. In light of the non-compliance
with Rules 6(1) and 6(2) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Rules,
1960, the proposed sub-bylaw is ordered as follows.
-: Order :-
Number: J.R.B./Amendment-2/26/2023-24 Dated: 20.02.2024
Under Sub-clause 2 of the section, exercising the powers conferred under
Section 12 of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies (Amendment) Act, 2012,
and Government Notification Number: CO:71:CLM:2016 dated: 06.12.2016,
I, Ashwathnarayan, Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Bangalore
Region, Bangalore, due to the reasons detailed in the preamble and
considering the non-compliance with the opportunities provided under Rule
6(1) and Rule 6(2) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Rules, 1960, in
convening and making decisions in the special general meeting of Kolar and
Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank, P.O. Box Number 11, DCC
Bank Road, Kolar-563101, reject the proposed amendments to sub-bylaw
numbers: 4(i) and 9(a).
- 59 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
This order is issued with my signature and office seal on the date:
20.02.2024.
Signature/-
(Ashwathnarayan)
Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Bangalore Region, Bangalore.
To,
Chief Executive Officers,
Kolar and Chikkaballapur District
Cooperative Central Bank Ltd,
P.O. Box Number 11, DCC Bank Road,
Kolar 563101.
For information copy to-
1) Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Kolar District, Kolar.
2) Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Kolar Subdivision.
Signature/-
On behalf of the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Bangalore Region, Bangalore.
Date of dispatch: 21.02.2014
Number of copies : 3 copies.
11. It is contended that this order dated 20-2-2024 of
the JRCS is contrary to Section 12 (2) (2-A) on the
ground that the proposed amendment having been
communicated to the JRCS on 7-11-2024, no action
having been taken for a period of three months is
deemed to have been passed. After such deeming
fiction kicking in, the question of rejecting the
- 60 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Resolution by the JRCS would not arise. There is a
violation of Section 12 (3) of the KCS Act.
12. In the meanwhile, certain other Writ Petitions in WP
No.20454/2024 and WP No.18829/2024, having
been filed, a direction has been issued by this Court
directing the completion of the process of election
within 90 days from the date of receipt of the order,
wherein the Deputy Commissioner of Kolar District,
who is the District Election Officer, was directed to do
the needful. That not having been done, a contempt
proceeding in CCC No.810/2024 has been filed,
which is pending.
13. After the rejection of the amendment, the 2nd
respondent - JRCS, has issued a direction invoking
Section 12 (5) of the KCS Act, to remove one
category pertaining to House Building Co-Operative
Societies, and one category from Milk Producers'
Women's Co-Operative Societies with a further
direction to include one seat each for Chelur and
- 61 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Manchenahalli in 'A' category by amending Byelaw
No.4-1 and 9A, with a further direction to the DCC
Bank to complete the process within 30 days, failing
which the JRCS would invoke the provision of Section
12 (6). A Corrigendum was issued to the same on 5-
8-2024, modifying the order dated 3-8-2024. By
virtue of which, the Housing Co-operative Society
was included in 'G' category and the Women's Co-
operative Society was included in 'D' category. Both
of which earlier had a separate constituency. The
direction issued by JRCS under Section 12 (5) of the
KCS Act on 03.08.2024 vide Annexure-F is
reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
ANNEXURE - F
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀgÀPÁgÀ
(¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ E¯ÁSÉ)
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÀ PÀbÃÉ j, ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ.
£ÀA.146, "¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ËzsÀ", 3£Éà ªÀĺÀr, 8£Éà CqÀØgÀ¸ÛÉ, ªÀiÁUÉÆÃð¸À gÀ¸ÛÉ, ªÀįÉèñÀégÀA,
¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ-03.
-: PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À PÁAiÉÄÝ 1959 PÀ®A 12(5) gÀ£éÀAiÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±À£À :-
- 62 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
«µÀAiÀÄB PÉÆïÁgÀ-aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤. PÉÆïÁgÀ EzÀgÀ
DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ¥ÀÄ£ÀgïgÀa¸ÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ.
G¯ÉèÃRB 1. UË|| PÀ£ÁðlPÀ GZÀÒ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ jmï ¦n¸À£ï ¸ÀASÉåB
19414/2023 (CS-RES) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ EªÀgÄÀ 19741/2023
(CS-RES)
2.¨ÁåAPï£À ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÉ ¸ÀASÉåB Pɹr¹¹©/AiÉÆÃ&C/9286/2023-24 ¢£ÁAPÀB
07.11.2023.
3.PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤., PÉÆïÁgÀ
EzÀgÀ G¥À «¢üUÀ¼À wzÀÄÝ¥Àr wgÀ¸ÌÀ øvÀ DzÉñÀ ¢£ÁAPÀB 20.02.2024.
4.aAvÁªÀÄt vÀD®ÆèPÄÀ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÉÆÃvÀà£ßÀ ªÀiÁgÁl ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ ¤,
aAvÁªÀÄt F ¸ÀAWÀzÀ ªÀÄ£À« ¢B15.07.2024
5. PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè PÉÃAzÀæ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¨ÁåAPï ¤AiÀÄ«ÄvÀ
¤, EªÀgÀ ¥ÀvæÀ¸ÀASÉåBPɹr¹¹©/AiÉÆÃ&C/3137,41/2024-25 ¢£ÁAPÀB
20.07.2024.
6. a®PÀ®£ÉÃ¥ÀÄð ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ ¤., ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ
F ¸ÀAWÀzÀ ªÀÄ£À« ¢.B 29.07.2024.
UË|| PÀ£ÁðlPÀ GZÀÒ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ ¤, a®PÀ®
£ÉêÀÄð ºÁUÀÆ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ ¤., ¸ÉÆêÀÄ£ÁxÀ¥ÄÀ gÀ gÀªÀgÄÀ jmï ¦nµÀ£ï
¸ÀASÉåB 19414/2023 (CS-RES) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ dgÀ§AqÀºÀ½î ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ ¤.,
ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ EªÀgÄÀ jmï ¦nµÀ£ï ¸ÀASÉå 19741/2023 (CS-RES) C£ÀÄß
zÁR°¹, DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è ºÉƸÀzÁV gÀZÀ£ÉAiÀiÁVgÀĪÀ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄUÀ½UÉ CªÀPÁ±À ¤ÃqÀ¢gÀĪÀ ºÁUÀÆ DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ½UÉ ¤AiÀĪÀiÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ
wzÀÄÝ¥Àr ªÀiÁqÀ¢gÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ ªÀÄ£À« ¸À°è¹, «±ÉõÀ ¸ÀªÀð¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀÄ®Ä
¤zÉÃð±À£À ¤ÃqÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. F ¸ÀA§AzsÀ UË| GZÀÒ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀĪÀÅ ¸ÀzÀj ¨ÁåAQUÉ
«±ÉõÀ ¸ÀªÀð ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀÄ®Ä ¤zÉÃð±À£À ¤ÃrgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
- 63 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤., PÉÆïÁgÀ EzÀgÀ
G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB 4(i) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9(J) UÀ½UÉ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr vÀgÄÀ ªÀ ¸ÀA§AzsÀ «±ÉõÀ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå
¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀÄĪÀ°è ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤tðAiÀÄ PÉÊUÉƼÀÄîªÀ°è PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ
1960 gÀ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 6(1) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 6(2) gÀ CªÀPÁ±ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ¥Á®£É ªÀiÁqÀzÉÃ
¸À°è¹gÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrAiÀÄÄ wgÀ¸ÌÀ øvÀªÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
KvÀ£ÀäzsÉå ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÀÄUÀ½UÉ ¥Áæw¤zsåÀ ¤ÃqÀ¢gÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
G¯ÉèÃR-4 gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ aAvÁªÀÄt vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÉÆÃvÀà£ßÀ ªÀiÁgÁl ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ ¤,
aAvÁªÀÄt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ G¯ÉèÃR-6 gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ a®PÀ®£ÉÃ¥ÀÄð ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ ¤,
ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ F ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÄÀ ªÀÄ£À« ¸À°è¹ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ UÀ½UÉ
¥Áæw¤zsÀå ¤ÃqÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃjgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. G¯ÉèÃR-5gÀ£éÀAiÀÄ ªÀÄÄRå PÁAiÀÄ𠤪ÀðºÀuÁ¢üPÁj,
PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåASï ¤., EªÀgÄÀ F ¸ÀA¨sÀAzsÀ ¸ÀÆPÀÛ
¤zÉÃð±À£À / DzÉñÀPÁÌV PÉÆÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
PÉÆïÁgÀ - aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåASï ¤., PÉÆïÁgÀ EzÀgÀ
DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è MlÄÖ 21 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÄÀ EzÀÄÝ, G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB 9(J)(1) gÀ£éÀAiÀÄ ¥Àæw
vÁ®ÆèQ¤AzÀ 12 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ EgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯ÉèUÀ¼À PÉëÃvÀæªÁgÀÄ
vÁ®ÆèPÀÄUÀ½UÉ CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¹zÀÄÝ, aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è ºÉƸÀzÁV gÀZÀ£ÉAiÀiÁVgÀĪÀAvÀºÀ
ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ UÀ½UÉ G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB 9(J)(1) gÀ£éÀAiÀÄ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß PÀ°à¸À®Ä ¤AiÀĪÀiÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ G¥À«¢üUÀ½UÉ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr vÀgÀ®Ä ¨ÁåAPï
«¥sÀ®ªÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ UÀ¼À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀPÉÌ ¸Àà¢üð¸À®Ä CªÀPÁ±À ªÀAavÀgÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
EzÀÄ ¨ÁåAPï£À G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB 9(J)(1)gÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¤AiÀĪÀÄ
1960gÀ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 13(1) gÀ CªÀPÁ±ÀUÀ½UÉ C£ÀÄUÀÄtªÁVgÀĪÀÅ¢®è.
G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB 9(J)(5) gÀAvÉ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÀÄlÖzÀ UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðtzÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ jUÉ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀzÀ CªÀPÁ±À EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. PÉÆïÁgÀ-
aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è PÁAiÀÄð¤gÀvÀ UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À ¥ÀæªiÀ ÁtªÀÅ
PÀrªÉÄ EgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀzÀj J¥sï ªÀUÀðzÀ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß vÉUÉAiÀħºÀÄzÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÄÀ f. ªÀUÀðzÀr ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀPÌÉ ¸Àà¢üð¸À®Ä CªÀPÁ±ÀªÀÅ
EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
- 64 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgÉzÀÄ G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB 9(J)(3) gÀAvÉ PÉÆïÁgÀ f¯Éè ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ
f¯ÉèAiÀÄ ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ jUÉ (ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ
ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹) 02 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ G¥À«¢ü
¸ÀASÉåB9(J)(4) gÀAvÉ JgÀqÆ À f¯ÉèAiÀÄ ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ
ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÀĪÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀjUÉ 01 ¸ÁÜ£À CªÀPÁ±À EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB9(J)(4) gÀ
CªÀPÁ±ÀzÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß vÉUÉzÄÀ ºÁQzÀ°è ¸ÀzÀj ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÀÄ r. ªÀUÀðzÀr ¤zÉñÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀPÌÉ ¸Àà¢üð¸À®Ä CªÀPÁ±ÀªÅÀ EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
ªÉÄîÌAqÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À »£À߯ÉAiÀÄ°è PÉÆïÁgÀ-aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ
¨ÁåASï ¤., PÉÆïÁgÀ EzÀgÀ DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÁgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ J¯Áè «zsÀzÀ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸ÄÀ ªÀÅzÀÄ CªÀ±åÀ PÀªÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ
¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß vÉUÉzÄÀ ºÁQ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è
ºÉƸÀzÁV gÀƦvÀUÉÆArgÀĪÀ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉîÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ UÀ½UÉ vÀ¯Á
MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À CªÀPÁ±ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß PÀ°à¸À®Ä DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
¥ÀÄ£ÀgïgÀa¹ ¨ÁåAPï£À G¥À«¢üUÀ¼À°è C¼ÀªÀr¹PÉƼÀî®Ä ¤zÉÃð±À£À ¤ÃqÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ¸ÀÆPÀÛªÉAzÀÄ
ªÀÄ£ÀUÀAqÀÄ F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ ¤zÉÃð±À£À ¤ÃrzÉ.
-: ¤zÉÃð±À£À :-
£ÀA.eÉDgï©/wzÀÄÝ¥Àr-2/12(5) ¤zÉÃð±À£À/2024-25 ¢£ÁAPÀB 03.08.2024
¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢ü¸ÀÆZÀ£É ¸ÀASÉåB ¹MB71B¹J¯ïJAB2016 gÀr zÀvÛÀªÁzÀ C¢üPÁgÀªÀ£ÀÄß
ZÀ¯Á¬Äw ²æà C±ÀévÀÜ£ÁgÁAiÀÄt, ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÄÀ , ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ À gÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ
DzÀ £Á£ÀÄ PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤., CAZÉ ¥ÉnÖUÉ
¸ÀASÉå 11, r¹¹ ¨ÁåAPï gÀ¸ÉÛ, PÉÆïÁgÀ-563101 EzÀgÀ DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è JgÀqÄÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ
vÁ®ÆèPÀĪÁgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ J¯Áè «zsÀzÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸ÄÀ ªÀÅzÀÄ
CªÀ±ÀåPÀªÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ 01 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß
vÉUÉzÀÄ ºÁQ, ¸ÀzÀj F 02 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è ºÉƸÀzÁV
gÀƦvÀUÉÆArgÀĪÀ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÄèPÄÀ UÀ½UÉ CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸À®Ä
DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸Àå ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ¥ÀÄ£ÀgïgÀa¹PÉÆAqÀÄ G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉåB 4(i) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9(J)
UÀ¼À°è C¼ÀªÀr¹PÉƼÀî®Ä ¤zÉÃð²¹gÀÄvÉÛãÉ. F ¤zÉÃð±À£À ¹éÃPÀj¹zÀ 30 ¢£ÀUÀ¼ÆÉ ¼ÀUÁV DqÀ½vÀ
ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸Àå ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÄ£ÀgïgÀa¹ C¼ÀªÀr¹PÉƼÀî®Ä ¤AiÀĪÀiÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ CUÀvÀå
PÀæªÀÄPÉÊUÉÆAqÀÄ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÉ ¸À°è¸À®Ä ¤zÉÃð²¹zÉ.
- 65 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
MAzÀÄ ªÉÃ¼É ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¹gÀĪÀ PÁ®«ÄwAiÉƼÀUÉ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À PÁAiÉÄÝ
1959 gÀ PÀ®A 12(5) gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁVgÀĪÀ F ¤zÉÃð±À£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ¥Á®£É ªÀiÁr wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
C¼ÀªÀr¹PÉÆAqÀÄ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£ÉUÉ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£É ¸À°è¸À¢zÀÝ ¥ÀPëÀzÀ°è PÀ®A 12(6) gÀ£éÀAiÀÄ
ªÉÄîÌAqÀAvÉ AiÀÄxÁ DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ gÀ ¥ÀÄ£ÀgïgÀZÀ£É CªÀPÁ±ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß G¥À«¢üUÀ¼À°è
C¼ÀªÀr¹PÉÆArzÉAiÉÄAzÀÄ £ÉÆÃAzÀt ªÀiÁr ¥ÀæªiÀ Át ¥ÀvæÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ¤uÁðAiÀÄPÀ ¸ÁPÀëöåªÁV
ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁUÀĪÀÅzÀÄ JAzÀÄ w½AiÀÄ¥Àr¹zÉ.
F DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß £À£ßÀ ¸À» ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀbÉÃj ªÉƺÀj£ÉÆA¢UÉ ¢£ÁAPÀB 03.08.2024
gÀAzÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀÄvÉÛãÉ.
¸À»/-
(C±ÀévÜÀ £ÁgÁAiÀÄt)
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÄÀ ,
¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ.
UÉ,
ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÄÀ ,
PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤.,
CAZÉ ¥ÉnÖUÉ ¸ÀASÉå 11, r¹¹ ¨ÁåAPï gÀ¸ÛÉ,
PÉÆïÁgÀ - 563101.
14. Ai Machine English translated version of the Direction
is as under:
ANNEXURE - F
Government of Karnataka
(Cooperation Department)
- 66 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Office of the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Bangalore
Region, Bangalore.
No. 146, "Sahakara Soudha", 3rd Floor, 8th Cross Road, Margosa Road,
Malleswaram, Bangalore-03.
-: Direction under Section 12(5) of the Karnataka Cooperative
Societies Act, 1959 :-
Subject: Reconstitution of the Board of Directors of Kolar-Chikkaballapur
District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Kolar.
Reference:
1. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court Writ Petition No. 19414/2023 (CS-RES) and
19741/2023 (CS-RES).
2. Bank's proposal No.: KCDCCB/Y&A/9286/2023-24 dated: 07.11.2023.
3. Rejection order dated: 20.02.2024 regarding amendment to the by-laws
of Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Kolar.
4. Chintamani Taluk Agricultural Produce Marketing Cooperative Society
Ltd., Chintamani's application dated: 15.07.2024.
5. Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd.'s letter
No.: KCDCCB/Y&A/3137,41/2024-25 dated: 20.07.2024.
6. Chilakalanerpu Agricultural Service Cooperative Society Ltd., Cheluru
Taluk's application dated: 29.07.2024.
In the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court, Agricultural Service Cooperative
Society Limited, Chilakalanerpu and Agricultural Service Cooperative Society
Ltd., Somanathapura have filed Writ Petition No. 19414/2023 (CS-RES) and
Jarabandahalli Agricultural Service Cooperative Society Ltd., Manchenahalli
Taluk have filed Writ Petition No. 19741/2023 (CS-RES), requesting to
convene a special general meeting to address the lack of representation for
- 67 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
newly formed Cheluru and Manchenahalli Taluks in the board of directors
and to amend the board positions as per rules. The Hon'ble High Court has
directed the said bank to convene a special general meeting of all members.
The amendment to the by-laws of Kolar and Chikkaballapur District
Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Kolar, under by-law numbers 4(1) and 9(a)
has been rejected due to non-compliance with Rule 6(1) and Rule 6(2) of
the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Rules, 1960, in convening the special
general meeting and making decisions.
Meanwhile, regarding the lack of representation for Cheluru and
Manchenahalli Taluks, as per Reference-4, Chintamani Taluk Agricultural
Produce Marketing Cooperative Society Ltd., Chintamani and as per
Reference-6, Chilakalanerpu Agricultural Service Cooperative Society Ltd.,
Cheluru Taluk have submitted applications requesting representation for
Cheluru and Manchenahalli Taluks. As per Reference-5, the Chief Executive
Officer of Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd.
has requested appropriate directions in this regard.
Kolar-Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Kolar has a
total of 21 directors in its board, with 12 directors from each taluk as per
by-law number 9(a)(1). Representation has been provided for taluks in
Kolar and Chikkaballapur districts, but due to the bank's failure to amend
the by-laws as per rules to provide director positions for newly formed
Manchenahalli and Cheluru Taluks in Chikkaballapur district, the cooperative
societies' board members from these taluks are deprived of the opportunity
to contest for director positions. This is not in accordance with by-law
number 9(a)(1) and Rule 13(1) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies
Rules, 1960.
According to by-law number 9(a)(5), there is an opportunity for one director
position for the board members of taluk-level housing cooperative societies.
Due to the limited number of housing cooperative societies operating within
the jurisdiction of Kolar-Chikkaballapur district, the said F category director
position can be removed, and the said cooperative societies will have the
opportunity to contest for a director position under G category.
- 68 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Furthermore, as per by-law number 9(a)(3), there are 02 director positions
available for the board members of milk producers' cooperative societies
(excluding women's milk producers' cooperative societies) in Kolar and
Chikkaballapur districts, and as per by-law number 9(a)(4), there is 01
position available for directors elected from women's milk producers'
cooperative societies in both districts. If the director position under by-law
number 9(a)(4) is removed, the said women's milk producers' cooperative
societies will have the opportunity to contest for a director position under D
category.
In light of the above points, it is necessary to provide opportunities for all
types of cooperative societies and taluk-wise representation in the board of
directors of Kolar-Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd.,
Kolar. Therefore, it is deemed appropriate to remove one director position
allocated to housing cooperative societies and one director position allocated
to women's milk producers' cooperative societies and provide one director
position each to the newly formed Manchenahalli Taluk and Cheluru Taluk in
Chikkaballapur district and to incorporate these changes into the bank's by-
laws. Accordingly, the following direction is issued.
-: Direction :-
No. JRB/Amendment-2/12(5) Direction/2024-25
Dated: 03.08.2024
Under the Government Notification Number: CO:71:CLM:2016, the
delegated authority exercised by Mr. Ashwathnarayana, Joint Registrar of
Cooperative Societies, Bangalore Region, I, hereby direct that in the
administrative board of the Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Cooperative
Central Bank Ltd., Post Box Number 11, DCC Bank Road, Kolar-563101, it is
necessary to provide opportunities to all types of cooperative societies in the
taluks of the two districts. Therefore, by removing one director position
allocated to the Housing Cooperative Societies and one director position
allocated to the Milk Producers Women's Cooperative Societies, these two
director positions are to be reallocated to the newly formed Manchenahalli
Taluk and Cheluru Taluk in Chikkaballapur district. The administrative board
- 69 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
member positions are to be restructured and incorporated under sub-rule
numbers: 4(i) and 9(a).
I direct that within 30 days of receiving this directive, the necessary steps
be taken in accordance with the rules to restructure and incorporate the
administrative board member positions and submit an amendment proposal.
In the event that the directive issued under Section 12(5) of the Karnataka
Cooperative Societies Act, 1959, is not complied with and the amendments
are not incorporated and submitted for approval within the stipulated time
frame, it is informed that under Section 12(6), the restructured
opportunities for administrative board members will be registered and a
certificate will be issued as conclusive evidence that the sub-rules have been
incorporated accordingly.
This order is issued under my signature and office seal on the date:
03.08.2024.
Signature/-
(Ashwathnarayana)
Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Bangalore Region, Bangalore.
To,
Managing Directors,
Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd.,
Post Box No. 11, DCC Bank Road,
Kolar 563101.
15. A Corrigendum was issued on 5.08.2024 modifying
the direction issued on 03.08.2024 at Annexure-G
which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference.
ANNEXURE - G
- 70 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀgÀPÁgÀ
(¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ E¯ÁSÉ)
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÀ PÀbÃÉ j, ¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ.
£ÀA.146, "¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ËzsÀ", 3£Éà ªÀĺÀr, 8£Éà CqÀØgÀ¸ÛÉ, ªÀiÁUÉÆÃð¸À gÀ¸ÛÉ, ªÀįÉèñÀégÀA,
¨ÉAUÀ¼Æ
À gÀÄ-03.
£ÀA.eÉDgï©/wzÀÄÝ¥Àr-2/12(5)¤zÉÃð±À£À/2024-25 ¢£ÁAPÀB 05.08.2024
BPÀ®A 12(5) gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±À£ÀzÀ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr ¤zÉÃð±À£ÀB
«µÀAiÀÄB PÉÆïÁgÀ-aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤., PÉÆïÁgÀ EzÀgÀ
DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸åÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ¥ÀÄ£Àgï gÀa¸ÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ.
G¯ÉèÃRB F PÀbÉÃjAiÀÄ ¸ÀªÄÀ ¸ÀASÉå PÀ®A 12(5)gÀ ¤zÉÃð±À£À ¢£ÁAPÀB 03.08.2024
* * * *
PÉÆïÁgÀ-aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤, PÉÆïÁgÀ EzÀgÀ DqÀ½vÀ
ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸Àå ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÄ£ÀgïgÀa¸ÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀAvÉ G¯ÉèÃRzÀ£éÀAiÀÄ ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁzÀ ¤zÉÃð±À£À
¥ÀÄl ¸ÀASÉå 03gÀ ¥ÁågÀ 01gÀ CA±ÀªÅÀ PɼÀPÀAqÀAwgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
"PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤., CAZÉ ¥ÉnÖUÉ ¸ÀASÉå
11, r¹¹ ¨ÁåAPï gÀ¸ÉÛ, PÉÆïÁgÀ-563101 EzÀgÀ DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è JgÀqÄÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ
vÁ®ÆèPÀĪÁgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ J¯Áè «zsÀzÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸ÄÀ ªÀÅzÀÄ
CªÀ±ÀåPÀªÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀgÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ 01 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄ
vÉUÉzÀÄ ºÁQ, ¸ÀzÀj F 02 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è ºÉƸÀzÁV
gÀƦvÀUÉÆArgÀĪÀ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ UÀ½UÉ CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸À®Ä
DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸ÀzÀ¸Àå ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ¥ÀÄ£Àgï gÀa¹PÉÆAqÀÄ G¥À«¢ü ¸ÀASÉå 4(1) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 9(J)
UÀ¼À°è C¼ÀªÀr¹PÉƼÀî®Ä ¤zÉÃð²¹gÀÄvÉÛãÉ."
- 71 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
¤zÉÃð±À£ÀzÀ°è "UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£À
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ 01 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß vÉUÉzÀÄ
ºÁQ, ¸ÀzÀj F 02 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÄÀ gÀ f¯ÉèAiÀÄ°è ºÉƸÀzÁV
gÀƦvÀUÉÆArgÀĪÀ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèPÄÀ UÀ½UÉ CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸À®Ä
JAzÀÄ EgÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ N¢PÉƼÀîvÀPÌÀ zÄÀ Ý.
"UÀȺÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß vÉUÉzÀÄ
ºÁQ ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ f ªÀUÀðzÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À°è CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸ÄÀ ªÀÅzÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
ºÁ®Ä GvÁàzÀPÀ ªÀÄ»¼Á ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀ MAzÀÄ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß vÉUÉzÀÄ
ºÁQ ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½UÉ r ªÀUÀðzÀ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À°è CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸ÄÀ ªÀÅzÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ
PÀrvÀªÁzÀ 02 ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀ ¸ÁÜ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ EzÀgÀ (ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQ£À ZÉüÀÆgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
a®PÀ®£ÉÃ¥ÀÄð ºÉÆç½UÀ¼À) ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÄÀ ªÀ
¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î (ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î vÁ®ÆèQ£À ªÀÄAZÉãÀºÀ½î ºÉÆç½ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
UËj©zÀ£ÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆèQ£À vÉÆAqɨÁ« ºÁUÀÆ r. ¥Á¼Àå ºÉÆç½UÀ¼À) ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ½AzÀ ZÀÄ£Á¬Ä¸À®àqÄÀ ªÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÄÀ (ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ/gÉÊvÀgÀ
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀAWÀ / ¸ÉêÁ ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ºÉ¸Àj¤AzÀ PÀgÉAiÀÄ®àqÄÀ ªÀ ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ
CxÀªÁ PÀȶ ¥ÀwÛ£À ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼ÄÀ ) UÀ½UÉ CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸À®Ä" JAzÀÄ N¢PÉƼÀîvÀPÌÀ zÀÄÝ.
F wzÀÄÝ¥Àr ¤zÉÃð±À£ÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß £À£ßÀ ¸À» ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀbÉÃj ªÉƺÀj£ÉÆA¢UÉ ¢£ÁAPÀB
05.08.2024 gÀAzÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀÄvÉÛãÉ.
¸À»/-
gÀªÀjUÉ,
(C±ÀévÜÀ £ÁgÁAiÀÄt)
ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ,
¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ ¸ÀAWÀUÀ¼À dAn ¤§AzsÀPÀgÄÀ ,
PÉÆïÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ aPÀ̧¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ
¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ¥ÁæAvÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ.
f¯Áè ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨ÁåAPï ¤.,
16. English translate
- 72 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
17. Ai Machine English translated version of the
corrigendum is as under:
ANNEXURE - G
Government of Karnataka
(Cooperative Department)
Office of the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Bangalore Division, Bangalore.
No.146, "Sahakara Soudha", 3rd Floor, 8th Cross Road, Margosa
Road, Malleshwaram, Bangalore-03.
No. JRB/Amendment-2/12(5)Direction/2024-25 Date: 05.08.2024
Amendment Direction under Section 12(5)
Subject: Regarding the reconstitution of the Board of Directors of the
Kolar-Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Kolar.
Reference: Direction under Section 12(5) of this office of even
number dated: 03.08.2024
In reference to the direction given regarding the reconstitution of the
Board of Directors of the Kolar-Chikkaballapur District Cooperative
Central Bank Ltd., Kolar, the content of paragraph 01 on page
number 03 is as follows:
"Due to the necessity of providing opportunities to the taluks of both
districts and all types of cooperative societies in the Board of
Directors of the Kolar and Chikkaballapur District Cooperative Central
Bank Ltd., Post Box No. 11, DCC Bank Road, Kolar-563101, the
- 73 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
position of one director allocated to the Housing Cooperative
Societies and one director position allocated to the Milk Producers
Women's Cooperative Societies is to be removed, and these 02
director positions are to be allocated to the newly formed
Manchenahalli Taluk and Cheluru Taluk in Chikkaballapur district by
reconstituting the Board of Directors and incorporating them in sub-
rule numbers 4(1) and 9(a)."
In the direction, the phrase "removing one director position allocated
to the Housing Cooperative Societies and one director position
allocated to the Milk Producers Women's Cooperative Societies and
allocating these 02 director positions to the newly formed
Manchenahalli Taluk and Cheluru Taluk in Chikkaballapur district"
should be read as follows:
"Removing one director position allocated to the Housing Cooperative
Societies and providing opportunities to the said cooperative societies
in category G cooperative societies, and removing one director
position allocated to the Milk Producers Women's Cooperative
Societies and providing opportunities to the said cooperative societies
in category D cooperative societies, and the two director positions to
be elected from the Primary Agricultural Credit Cooperative Societies
of Cheluru (Cheluru Taluk's Cheluru and Chilakalanerpu Hoblis) and
Manchenahalli (Manchenahalli Taluk's Manchenahalli Hobli and
Gauribidanur Taluk's Tondebavi and D. Palya Hoblis) (Agricultural
Service Cooperative Society/Farmers Cooperative Service
Society/Service Cooperative Society known by any name as primary
or agricultural credit cooperative societies)."
This amendment direction is issued with my signature and office seal
on date: 05.08.2024.
Signature/-
(Ashwathnarayana)
Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Bangalore Division, Bangalore.
To,
Managing Directors,
Kolar and Chikkaballapur
- 74 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd.,
Post Box No. 11,
DCC Bank Road,
Kolar-563101.
18. It is aggrieved by the same that the Petitioner is
before this Court.
Facts in WP No. 22271/2024.
19. The facts are more or less identical to WP
No.21521/2024. Petitioner in the above matter
claims to be a Primary Society. It is further stated
that the DCC Bank consists of 1067 Primary Societies
under various categories from 'A' to 'F'. The
categorization being made on the basis and nature of
functioning, the total number of Directors being
capped at 21 consisting of 18 elected members, one
member nominated by the Government, another
member representing the Apex Bank and the JRCS
being an ex-officio member of the Federal Society.
- 75 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
20. It is submitted that the Petitioner is represented by
one of its directors. The Governing and the Managing
Committee having passed a resolution, authorizing
the Director to file the above petition.
21. Sri.Jayakumar S. Patil, learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the Petitioner in WP No.21521/2024
would submit that:
21.1. There is a need to hold the election of the DCC
Bank as soon as possible. The term having
expired, the interests of all the Societies within
the District of Kolar and Chikkaballapura are
being adversely affected on account of delay in
holding such election. This Court in WP
No.20454/2023, vide order dated 31-05-2024,
had directed the elections to be held at the
earliest vide its order dated 3-7-2024, taking
into account that the board's term expired on
19-11-2024. The submission is that on account
of the expiry of the term of the Board, an
- 76 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Administrator has been appointed under
Section 28-A (5). Even prior to the
Administrator being appointed, a meeting had
been held on 12-8-2023 to amend the byelaws.
The said amendment not being considered in
terms of direction issued in WP No.19414/2023
and other connected matters dated 21-9-2023,
a Special General Meeting was held on 6-11-
2023 and a resolution was passed amending
the byelaws which was forwarded to the 2nd
respondent on 7-11-2023.
21.2. His submission is that the said amendment,
having been received by the JRCS on 7-11-
2023 in terms of Section 12 (2)(v), is required
to be registered within a period of three months
from the date of receipt of the proposal. The
same not having been done in terms of Section
12 (2A), there is a deeming fiction that the
amendment is deemed to have been approved
and deemed to have been registered. The
- 77 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
proposal having been forwarded on 7-11-2023
on the close of day of 6-2-2024, that is after
the expiry of 90 days, the said amendment
which has been approved and passed by way of
a resolution of the DCC Bank is deemed to have
been approved, registered and come into
operation. Hence, the question of rejecting the
same on 20-2-2024 by the JRCS would not
arise.
21.3. His submission in this regard is once the
deeming fiction, were to kick in, the JRCS
becomes functus officio. There is no power
vested with the JRCS to reject any of the
resolutions for amendment passed by the
Society after the expiry of 90 days. Even
otherwise, he submits that the rejection, if any,
could be made in terms of Section 12(2) so
long as there is no violation of Section 12 (2)
and sub-clauses (i) to (v) thereof, the JRCS
- 78 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
would also not have any power to reject the
amendment.
21.4. In the present case, there is no order that has
been passed under Section 12(2) except to
state that the amendment proposed has been
rejected. After such rejection on 20-2-2024, no
action was taken till 3-8-2024 when a direction
came to be issued under Section 12 (5). This,
he submits, has been done after a direction had
been issued in WP.20454/2023 on 3-7-2024 to
hold elections. Thus, he submits that the
direction issued under Section 12 (5), was with
the intention to postpone the election by
creating an impediment in holding the election,
since fresh action would have to be taken after
the amendment recommended by the Registrar
under Section 12 (5).
- 79 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
21.5. He relies upon the decision in the case of
Rustom Cavasjee Cooper v. Union of India1
more particularly Paras 14 and 18 thereof,
which is reproduced hereunder for easy
reference:
"14. By a petition praying for a writ against
infringement of fundamental rights, except in a
case where the petition is for a writ of habeas
corpus and probably for infringement of the
guarantee under Articles 17, 23 and 24, the
Petitioner may seek relief in respect of his own
rights and not of others. The shareholder of a
Company, it is true, is not the owner of its assets;
he has merely a right to participate in the profits of
the Company subject to the contract contained in
the Article of Association. But on that account the
petitions will not fail. A measure executive or
legislative may impair the rights of the Company
alone, and not of its shareholders; it may impair
the rights of the shareholders and not of the
Company: it may impair the rights of the
shareholders as well as of the Company.
Jurisdiction of the Court to grant relief cannot be
denied, when by State action the rights of the
individual shareholder are impaired, even if that
action impairs the rights of the Company as well.
The test in determining whether the shareholder's
right is impaired is not formal: it is essentially
qualitative: if the State action impairs the right of
the shareholders as well as of the Company, the
Court will not, concentrating merely upon the
technical operation of the action deny itself
jurisdiction to grant relief."
AIR 1970 SCC 564
- 80 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
"18. It was urged that in any event the guarantee
of freedom of trade does not occur in Part III of the
Constitution, and the Petitioner is no entitled to
maintain a petition for breach of that guarantee in
this Court. But the Petitioner does not seek by
these petitions to enforce the guarantee of freedom
of trade and commerce in Article 301: he claims
that in enacting the Act the Parliament has violated
a constitutional restriction imposed by Part XIII on
its legislative power and in determining the extent
to which his fundamental freedoms are impaired,
the statute which the Parliament is incompetent to
enact must be ignored."
21.6. By relying on Rustom Cavasjee Cooper's
case, he submits that even a Director of a Co-
operative Society could seek for reliefs in
respect of the Society and its other members
when any action of the State would impair the
rights of the members. He submitted that
technicality ought not to come in the way of
this Court considering the matter and passing
appropriate orders to safeguard the interests of
the members of the Society. The constitutional
restriction imposed on the legislative power
- 81 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
impairing the rights of the members, this Court
could exercise jurisdiction in the present
matter, even though the Federal Society is not
before this Court.
22. Sri. M. R. Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the Petitioner in W.P.No.22271/2024,
would submit that:
22.1. The Federal Society has eliminated the
nominees of the Apex Bank and the House
Building Co-operative Society in order to make
room for representatives of the two new talukas
that have been created in Chikkaballapura
District. There being a requirement for each
taluka to be represented, the maximum ceiling
of number of directors being 21 imposed by the
Statute in terms of Section 28A of the KCS Act,
more particularly Section 28A(ii). The
composition of the Board of Directors having
already reached 21, the only manner in which
- 82 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
the two new talukas could be represented is by
eliminating two earlier members and making
provision for these two Talukas. The Federal
Society, in its wisdom, has chosen to eliminate
a nominee of the Apex Bank and eliminate a
representative of the House Building Co-
operative Society. This action has been taken
democratically by the majority and the
Registrar could not have found fault therewith
and reject the amendment proposed by the
Apex Society. The Registrar ought to have
accepted the amendment proposed by the
Society.
22.2. He relies upon the decision of this Court in the
case of Sri.Venkategowda & Ors vs. State of
Karnataka & Ors2 more particularly Paras 8,
9, 10, 11 and 15 thereof, which are reproduced
hereunder easy reference:
WP No.48973/2019 & connected matters dated 4.8.2021
- 83 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
8. Shri. Subramanya, learned AAG has placed
reliance on Namit Sharma Vs. Union of India5 and
argued that a law could be declared
unconstitutional, only on limited grounds namely;
Legislative incompetence, violation of Part-III of
the Constitution and reasonableness of the law.
The relevant paragraph reads as follows:
"11. An enacted law may be constitutional or
unconstitutional. Traditionally, this Court had
provided very limited grounds on which an
enacted law could be declared unconstitutional.
They were legislative competence, violation of
Part III of the Constitution and reasonableness of
the law. The first two were definite in their scope
and application while the cases falling in the third
category remained in a state of uncertainty. With
the passage of time, the law developed and the
grounds for unconstitutionality also widened. D.D.
Basu in Shorter Constitution of India (14th Edn.,
2009) has detailed, with reference to various
judgments of this Court, the grounds on which the
law could be invalidated or could not be
invalidated. Reference to them can be made as
follows:
"Grounds of unconstitutionality.-- A law may be
unconstitutional on a number of grounds:
(i) Contravention of any fundamental right,
specified in Part III of the Constitution. (Ref.
Under Article 143: Special Reference No. 1 of
1964, In re [AIR 1965 SC 745 : (1965) 1 SCR
413] .)
(ii) Legislating on a subject which is not assigned
to the relevant legislature by the distribution of
powers made by the Seventh Schedule, read with
- 84 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
the connected articles. (Ref. Special Reference
No. 1 of 1964, In re [AIR 1965 SC 745 : (1965) 1
SCR 413] .)
(iii) Contravention of any of the mandatory
provisions of the Constitution which impose
limitations upon the powers of a legislature e.g.
Article 301. (Ref. Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd. v. State of
Assam [AIR 1961 SC 232].)
(iv) In the case of a State law, it will be invalid
insofar as it seeks to operate beyond the
boundaries of the State. (State of Bombay v.
R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala [AIR 1957 SC 699] .)
(v) That the legislature concerned has abdicated
its essential legislative function as assigned to it
by the Constitution or has made an excessive
delegation of that power to some other body.
(Hamdard Dawakhana v. Union of India [AIR 1960
SC 554 : 1960 Cri LJ 735] .")
(Emphasis supplied)
9. He has next relied upon State of Madhya
Pradesh Vs. Rakesh Kohli and another6, which
reads as under:
"16. The statute enacted by Parliament or a State
Legislature cannot be declared unconstitutional
lightly. The court must be able to hold beyond any
iota of doubt that the violation of the
constitutional provisions was so glaring that the
legislative provision under challenge cannot stand.
Sans flagrant violation of the constitutional
provisions, the law made by Parliament or a State
Legislature is not declared bad.
- 85 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
17. This Court has repeatedly stated that
legislative enactment can be struck down by court
only on two grounds, namely (i) that the
appropriate legislature does not have the
competence to make the law, and (ii) that it does
not (sic) take away or abridge any of the
fundamental rights enumerated in Part III of the
Constitution or any other constitutional
provisions. In McDowell and Co. [(1996) 3 SCC
709] while dealing with the challenge to an
enactment based on Article 14, this Court stated
in para 43 of the Report as follows: (SCC pp.737-
38)
"43. ... A law made by Parliament or the
legislature can be struck down by courts on two
grounds and two grounds alone viz. (1) lack of
legislative competence, and (2) violation of any of
the fundamental rights guaranteed in Part III of
the Constitution or of any other constitutional
provision. There is no third ground. ... if an
enactment is challenged as violative of Article 14,
it can be struck down only if it is found that it is
violative of the equality clause/equal protection
clause enshrined therein. Similarly, if an
enactment is challenged as violative of any of the
fundamental rights guaranteed by sub-clauses (a)
to (g) of Article 19(1), it can be struck down only
if it is found not saved by any of the clauses (2)
to (6) of Article 19 and so on. No enactment can
be struck down by just saying that it is arbitrary
or unreasonable. Some or the other constitutional
infirmity has to be found before invalidating an
Act. An enactment cannot be struck down on the
ground that court thinks it unjustified. Parliament
and the legislatures, composed as they are of the
representatives of the people, are supposed to
know and be aware of the needs of the people
and what is good and bad for them. The court
cannot sit in judgment over their wisdom."
- 86 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
(Emphasis Supplied)
10. It is also trite law that there is always
presumption of Constitutionality. In any event,
there is no challenge to the Legislative
competence nor it is argued that the Amendment
is violative of Part-III or unreasonable. On the
other hand, learned Advocates for the petitioners
and particularly Shri. Shailesh Kathari submitted
that except the fact that the Statement of objects
are based on the 97th amendment, the
amendment to Section 20 (a-iv) and (a-v) are
welcome. Thus, the controversy is in a very
narrow compass namely the effect of the
Statement of Objects and Reasons. On this point,
Shri. Subramanya has cited Union of India and
Others Vs. Exide Industries Limited and Another7.
The relevant paragraphs read as follows:
"31. The Court was more categorical in restating
the position in Sanjeev Coke Mfg. Co. v. Bharat
Coking Coal Ltd. [Sanjeev Coke Mfg. Co. v. Bharat
Coking Coal Ltd., (1983) 1 SCC 147] , where it
noted : (SCC p. 172, para 25)
"25. ... No one may speak for Parliament and
Parliament is never before the court. After
Parliament has said what it intends to say, only
the court may say what the Parliament meant to
say. None else. Once a statute leaves Parliament
House, the Court is the only authentic voice which
may echo (interpret) the Parliament. This the
court will do with reference to the language of the
statute and other permissible aids."
32. The express Objects and Reasons, therefore,
serves a limited purpose of assisting the Court in
examining the validity of a provision, especially
when the Court is sitting over the interpretation of
an ambiguous provision.
- 87 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
33. Indubitably, when the Court examines the
validity of a provision, its primary concern is the
literal text of the provision. It is so because the
legislature speaks through the text and as long as
it is not speaking in an equivocal manner, there is
limited space for the Court to venture beyond the
text. This constitutes the first test of
interpretation, often termed as the literal
interpretation. If the text of the provision is
unambiguous, the legislative intent gets coalesced
and is epitomised therefrom.
34. In other words, when the textual element of
the provision reeks of ambiguity and is
susceptible to multiple meanings, the Court enters
into a proactive examination to find out the real
meaning of the provision. This proactive
examination by the Court offers multiple avenues
and methods to achieve the ultimate purpose of
interpretation. Adverting to the express Objects
and Reasons may be useful for limited purpose to
understand the surrounding circumstances at the
time of enactment. The Court is not bound by
such external elements, as discussed above.
Therefore, the presence or absence of Objects
and Reasons has no impact upon the
constitutional validity of a provision as long as the
literal features of the provision enable the Court
to comprehend its true meaning with sufficient
clarity."
(Emphasis Supplied)
11. Shri. Subramanya has also relied upon
Keshavlal Khemchand and Sons Pvt. Ltd., and
Others Vs. Union of India and Others8, wherein it
is held that the Objects and reasons are not voted
upon by the Legislature.
- 88 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
15. 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 namely, Section 20(a-iv) and
(a-v) shall be effective for elections to be held
post disposal of these writ petitions."
22.3. On account of the 97th amendment to the
Constitution, the right of the Co-operative
Society to be democratically run has been
accepted. This right now being incorporated in
the Constitution, the Registrar cannot interfere
in the working of the Society. The rejection of
the amendment and the direction by the
- 89 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Registrar cannot interfere in the working of the
Society to eliminate certain other member,
instead of that eliminated by the Society, this is
an interference in the working of the Society,
which cannot be countenanced either in law or
fact.
22.4. He relies upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of Vipulbhai M.Chaudhary
vs. Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing
Federation Limited and others3 more
particularly Paras 4, 5, 6 and 8 thereof, which
are reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
4. The International Co-operative Alliance
Statement on the Co-operative Identity was
adopted in Manchester, United Kingdom on 23-9-
1995. A "co-operative" is defined as:
"A co-operative is an autonomous association of
persons united voluntarily to meet their common
economic, social and cultural needs and
aspirations through a jointly-owned and
democratically-controlled enterprise."
(emphasis supplied)
(2015) 8 SCC 1
- 90 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
5. The Statement also provides for "values" on
which co-operatives should model themselves,
which reads as follows:
"Co-operatives are based on the values of self-
help, self-responsibility, democracy, equality,
equity and solidarity. In the tradition of their
founders, co-operative members believe in the
ethical values of honesty, openness, social
responsibility and caring for others."
(emphasis supplied)
6. The Statement further provides for "seven co-
operative principles" as guidelines by which the co-
operatives put their values into practice. Following
are the principles:
"1st Principle
Voluntary and open membership.--Co-
operatives are voluntary organizations, open to
all persons able to use their services and willing
to accept the responsibilities of membership,
without gender, social, racial, political or
religious discrimination.
2nd Principle
Democratic member control.--Co-operatives
are democratic organizations controlled by their
members, who actively participate in setting
their policies and making decisions. Men and
women serving as elected representatives are
accountable to the membership. In primary co-
operatives, members have equal voting rights
(one member, one vote) and co-operatives at
other levels are also organized in a democratic
manner.
- 91 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
3rd Principle
Member economic participation.--Members
contribute equitably to, and democratically
control, the capital of their co-operative. At least
part of that capital is usually the common
property of the co-operative. Members usually
receive limited compensation, if any, on capital
subscribed as a condition of membership.
Members allocate surpluses for any or all of the
following purposes : developing their co-
operative, possibly by setting up reserves, part
of which at least would be indivisible; benefiting
members in proportion to their transactions with
the co-operative; and supporting other activities
approved by the membership.
4th Principle
Autonomy and independence.--Co-operatives
are autonomous, self-help organizations
controlled by their members. If they enter to
agreements with other organizations, including
governments, or raise capital from external
sources, they do so on terms that ensure
democratic control by their members and
maintain their co-operative autonomy.
5th Principle
Education, training and information.--Co-
operatives provide education and training for
their members, elected representatives,
managers and employees so they can contribute
effectively to the development of their co-
operatives. They inform the general public--
particularly young people and opinion leaders--
about the nature and benefits of cooperation.
6th Principle
- 92 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Cooperation among co-operatives.--Co-
operatives serve their members most effectively
and strengthen the co-operative movement by
working together through local, national,
regional and international structures.
7th Principle
Concern for community.--Co-operatives work
for the sustainable development of their
communities through policies approved by their
members."
(emphasis supplied)
8. Apart from providing for the right to form co-
operative societies to be a fundamental right under
Article 19 of the Constitution of India and insertion
of Article 43-B under the directive principles of
State policy on promotion of co-operative societies,
the 97th Amendment also introduced a new Part IX-
B on co-operative societies. Reference to the
Statement of Objects and Reasons of the
Amendment would give a clear picture as to the
need to strengthen the democratic basis and
provide for a constitutional status to the co-
operative societies. Thus, one has to see the
constitutional aspirations on the concept of co-
operative societies after the 97th Amendment in the
Constitution of India which came into effect on 12-
1-2012.
"Statement of Objects and Reasons
1. The co-operative sector, over the years, has
made significant contribution to various sectors
of national economy and has achieved
voluminous growth. However, it has shown
weaknesses in safeguarding the interests of the
members and fulfilment of objects for which
these institutions were organised. There have
been instances where elections have been
- 93 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
postponed indefinitely and nominated office-
bearers or administrators remaining in charge of
these institutions for a long time. This reduces
the accountability of the management of co-
operative societies to their members.
Inadequate professionalism in management in
many of the co-operative institutions has led to
poor services and low productivity. Co-
operatives need to run on well-established
democratic principles and elections held on time
and in a free and fair manner. Therefore, there
is a need to initiate fundamental reforms to
revitalise these institutions in order to ensure
their contribution in the economic development
of the country and to serve the interests of
members and public at large and also to ensure
their autonomy, democratic functioning and
professional management.
2. 'Co-operative societies' is a subject
enumerated in Entry 32 of the State List of the
Seventh Schedule of the Constitution and the
State Legislatures have accordingly enacted
legislations on co-operative societies. Within the
framework of State Acts, growth of co-
operatives on large scale was envisaged as part
of the efforts for securing social and economic
justice and equitable distribution of the fruits of
development. It has, however, been
experienced that in spite of considerable
expansion of co-operatives, their performance in
qualitative terms has not been up to the desired
level. Considering the need for reforms in the
Co-operative Societies Acts of the States,
consultations with the State Governments have
been held at several occasions and in the
conferences of State Co-operative Ministers. A
strong need has been felt for amending the
Constitution so as to keep the co-operatives free
from unnecessary outside interferences and also
- 94 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
to ensure their autonomous organisational set-
up and their democratic functioning.
3.The Central Government is committed to
ensure that the co-operative societies in the
country function in a democratic, professional,
autonomous and economically sound manner.
With a view to bring the necessary reforms, it is
proposed to incorporate a new Part in the
Constitution so as to provide for certain
provisions covering the vital aspects of working
of co-operative societies like democratic,
autonomous and professional functioning. A new
article is also proposed to be inserted in Part IV
of the Constitution (Directive Principles of State
Policy) for the States to endeavour to promote
voluntary formation, autonomous functioning,
democratic control and professional
management of co-operative societies. The
proposed new Part in the Constitution, inter alia,
seeks to empower Parliament in respect of
multi-State co-operative societies and the State
Legislatures in case of other co-operative
societies to make appropriate law, laying down
the following matters, namely:
(a) provisions for incorporation, regulation and
winding up of co-operative societies based on
the principles of democratic member-control,
member-economic participation and
autonomous functioning;
(b) specifying the maximum number of Directors
of a co-operative society to be not exceeding
twenty-one members;
(c) providing for a fixed term of five years from
the date of election in respect of the elected
members of the Board and its office-bearers;
- 95 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
(d) providing for a maximum time-limit of six
months during which a Board of Directors of co-
operative Society could be kept under
supersession or suspension;
(e) providing for independent professional audit;
(f) providing for right of information to the
members of the co-operative societies;
(g) empowering the State Governments to
obtain periodic reports of activities and accounts
of co-operative societies;
(h) providing for the reservation of one seat for
the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes
and two seats for women on the Board of every
co-operative Society, which have individuals as
members from such categories;
(i) providing for offences relating to co-operative
societies and penalties in respect of such
offences.
4.It is expected that these provisions will not
only ensure the autonomous and democratic
functioning of co-operatives, but also ensure the
accountability of management to the members
and other stakeholders and shall provide for
deterrence for violation of the provisions of the
law.
5. The Bill seeks to achieve the above
objectives."
(emphasis supplied)
22.5. By relying on Vipulbhai M.Chaudhary's case,
his submission is that a co-operative is
- 96 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
autonomous association of persons, united
voluntarily to meet common economic social
and cultural needs and aspirations in a
democratically controlled enterprise. This
control democratically is by way of members
electing the representatives and the said
elected representatives taking necessary action
in terms of a collective decision in the interest
of the members of Society. Thus, he submits
that this right to democratically decide and
control the co-operative is a fundamental
requirement of Co-operative Society.
22.6. Again, by relying on the International Co-
operative Alliance statement reproduced
hereinabove, he submits that the co-operatives
are based on values of self-help, self-
responsibility, democracy, equality, equity and
solidarity. Thus, when principles of democracy
are applied, the Registrar cannot negate a
democratically passed resolution proposing a
- 97 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
particular amendment. He reiterates and
emphasizes that the control and or the
operation of the Society can only be made
democratically. It is the choice of the Society as
to who would be the members, who could be
elected to the governing board, and in what
manner. The same cannot be interdicted by the
Registrar or no direction can be issued by the
Registrar in relation thereto.
22.7. He relies upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of Ghulam Qadir vs. Special
Tribunal and others4, more particularly Paras
37 and 38 thereof, which are reproduced
hereunder for easy reference:
37. Regarding locus standi of the respondents to
file the writ petition against the order of the
Tribunal, Shri Rao has launched a two-pronged
attack submitting that the respondent tenants
being not the aggrieved parties had no right to
challenge the order passed against them as they
claimed through the Custodian and did not have
any independent right in themselves. So far as the
(2002) 1 SCC 33
- 98 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
authorities under the Act are concerned, it is
submitted that they could not have preferred a
writ petition being a quasi-judicial authority
entrusted with the powers of adjudication of rights
of the claimants over the property vesting in such
authorities. In support of his submissions, he has
referred to various provisions of the Act and relied
upon some pronouncements of this Court.
38. There is no dispute regarding the legal
proposition that the rights under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India can be enforced only by an
aggrieved person except in the case where the writ
prayed for is for habeas corpus or quo warranto.
Another exception in the general rule is the filing
of a writ petition in public interest. The existence
of the legal right of the Petitioner which is alleged
to have been violated is the foundation for
invoking the jurisdiction of the High Court under
the aforesaid article. The orthodox rule of
interpretation regarding the locus standi of a
person to reach the court has undergone a sea
change with the development of constitutional law
in our country and the constitutional courts have
been adopting a liberal approach in dealing with
the cases or dislodging the claim of a litigant
merely on hypertechnical grounds. If a person
approaching the court can satisfy that the
impugned action is likely to adversely affect his
right which is shown to be having source in some
statutory provision, the petition filed by such a
person cannot be rejected on the ground of his not
having the locus standi. In other words, if the
person is found to be not merely a stranger having
no right whatsoever to any post or property, he
cannot be non-suited on the ground of his not
having the locus standi.
- 99 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
22.8. By relying on Ghulam Qadir's case, he
submits that even a member Society of a
Federal Society would have a right to agitate
any grievance as regards the composition of the
governing body of the Federal Society. Since
the Federal Society is a co-operative of the
individual societies, the members of the Federal
Society being the individual societies, it is the
interest of the individual societies, which is
represented by the Federal Society. Thus, any
aspect relating to the management and
administration of the Federal Society would
impinge upon the rights of the individual
members, providing locus to the individual
member to agitate a right in relation to the
Federal Society.
22.9. The conventional and orthodox rule of locus
standi cannot be applied in such a situation.
This Court ought to expand the interpretation of
locus standi to include a member of a Co-
- 100 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
operative Society, in this case a Primary
Society, to come within the meaning of an
aggrieved party, entitling the Primary Society to
challenge any direction issued to a Federal
Society. He relies upon the order of the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Uppinangady Co-operative Agricultural
Society Limited & ors vs. The State of
Karnataka & ors.,5 more particularly Paras 22
to 31, which are reproduced hereunder for easy
reference:
22. The statement of objects and reasons is
explicit. The 97th amendment to the Constitution
is aimed to strengthen the Co-operative Sector,
which has played a significant role in the economy
of the nation. Some of the objects of the 97th
amendment are crystalysed in Article 43-B. Said
Article directs the State to promote voluntary
formation, autonomous functioning, democratic
control, and professional management of co-
operative societies.
23. In tune with such Directive Principle, the Act of
1959 is amended in 2013. Article 19(1)(c) is not
the only provision amended in terms of the
WP No.26102/2023 & connected matters dated 8.8.2024
- 101 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
97thAmendment. A whole new Article in the form
of Article 43-B is inserted. Pursuant to that the Act
of 1959 is also amended in sync with the 97th
amendment to the Constitution.
24. The newly inserted Article 43-B reads as
under:- 43-B. Promotion of Co-operative
Societies.-
"The State shall promote voluntary formation,
autonomous functioning, democratic control and
professional management of Co-operative
Societies".
The very phrase found in Article 43-B is introduced
by way of amendment of the Act of 1959.
25. Now the question is what actually these
amendments mean and how it will impact co-
operative societies. The expression "autonomous
functioning" speaks about the autonomy of a co-
operative society in its functioning. The plain
dictionary meaning of the word "autonomous" (as
in Merriam- Webster dictionary) is as follows:-
a. "having the right or power of self-government
b. undertaken or carried on without outside control
: Self contained
c. existing or capable of existing independently
d. responding, reacting, or developing
independently of the whole"
26. The portion of the statement of the object
specifically lays emphasis by saying "A strong need
- 102 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
has been felt for amending the Constitution so as
to keep the Co-operatives free from unnecessary
outside interferences and also to ensure their
autonomous organisational set-up and their
democratic functioning". In the context of what is
stated above, the expression "autonomous
functioning", apart from self-control and self-
governance also means less interference by
outsiders.
27. The expression "democratic control" speaks
about the control of a co-operative society by the
Elected Body/Board. Said control cannot be
interpreted to say that the Board will have no
power to recruit, transfer, and hold a disciplinary
inquiry when those functions are undoubtedly
essential in the management of a co-operative
society. The interpretation that the right to form a
co-operative society is only confined to the
formation and registration of a co-operative
society and not beyond, will defeat the purpose of
97th amendment of the Constitution of India.
Thus, the expression democratic control would also
mean control over recruitment, transfer and
disciplinary action. Of course, such control cannot
be expanded to say that the absolute control vests
with the co-operative Society. The right may be
subjected to regulations which are reasonable. For
example, generally speaking, the State may
certainly fix the qualifications for certain important
posts, frame guidelines for transfer of employees
within various branches of a co-operative society if
it is having more than one branch.
28. Indeed it is true, that dimensions and contours
of a fundamental right to form a co-operative
society are not elaborated in Article 19(1)(c).
However, Article 43-B which is simultaneously
introduced by way of the 97th Constitutional
amendment is a pointer and the guide to the
- 103 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
nature of fundamental right guaranteed in Article
19(1)(c). As already noticed, the statement of
objects and reasons for 97th amendment
unequivocally speak about the need to strengthen
the co-operative movement and the sector by
providing autonomy in its functioning and ensuring
democratic control and professional management.
Had the parliament intended to make the
formation of a co-operative society a fundamental
right and confine the said fundamental right only
to the extent of formation and registration of a co-
operative society, there was no need to introduce
Article 43-B of the Constitution of India.
29. Article 43-B of the Constitution of India
imposes obligation on the State to endeavor to
promote voluntary formation, autonomous
functioning, democratic control, and professional
management of co-operative societies. It also goes
without saying that the four components envisaged
in Article 43-B are supplemental to each other and
aim at promoting and strengthening Co-operative
Sector. And one of the ways to achieve it is to
ensure less Government control.
30. Since the whole amendment is aimed at
providing functional autonomy and to strengthen
the Co-operative Sector by promoting voluntary
formation, it is imperative that the association of
people who have come together to form a co-
operative society should have a say in crucial
matters relating to recruitment, transfer and
disciplinary action against the employees.
31. Keeping in mind the Directive Principles
contained in Article 43-B, this Court is of the view
that the fundamental right to form a co-operative
society does not stop and stands fulfilled on the
mere formation and registration of a co-operative
- 104 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
society. The fundamental right to form a co-
operative society in its fold also includes a right to
autonomous functioning. The view that there is no
fundamental right over the matter pertaining to
recruitment, transfer and disciplinary action of
employees of the co-operative Society would
defeat the object of Article 43-B of Constitution of
India. However, the right of autonomous
functioning can certainly be subjected to certain
regulations and reasonable restrictions. However,
the regulations and restrictions cannot encroach
upon certain basic aspects of the formation of a
co-operative society and autonomous functioning
envisaged under Article 43-B of the Constitution of
India.
22.10. By relying on Uppinangady Co-operative
Agricultural Society's case, he submits that
the objects of the 97th Amendment to the
Constitution have been dealt with in detail by
the Coordinate Bench of this Court. He
reiterates that the 97th Amendment has been
brought about to strengthen the Co-operative
sector, which has been so done in tune with the
directive principles of State Policy. Apart from
recognizing a right to form a co-operative under
Article 19(1)(c), a new article in Article 43-B
has been inserted which mandates the State to
- 105 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
promote voluntary formation, autonomous
functioning, democratic control and professional
management of Co-operative Societies.
22.11. By relying on Article 43B, his submission is that
the State cannot act contrary to the mandate
under Article 43B. The instructions issued by
the Registrar to carry out amendment in a
particular way by negating the amendment
proposed by the Society falls foul of Article 43B
and thereby also impinges upon Article
19(1)(c). Since the manner and methodology of
formation of a Society by individuals and or
entities is curtailed and impinged upon by such
direction of the Registrar.
22.12. He submits that the Coordinate Bench of this
Court in Uppinangady's case has read
together Article 19(1)(c) and Article 43B to
arrive at the intention and the purpose of
19(1)(c) inserted vide the Constitutional
Amendment, and these aspects have been
- 106 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
violated by the Registrar in the present matter.
The Apex body has followed all the applicable
law and procedures. The amendment, which
has been carried out by the Apex Society,
complies with the requirements of the Act and
the Rules, and therefore, it was but required for
the Registrar to approve the amendment.
22.13. His submission is also that the Apex Bank is
not, as a matter of right, entitled to be
nominated on the board of a Society. The funds
are not released by the Apex Bank but are
released by NABARD through the Apex Bank.
NABARD not having insisted on a nominee, the
question of the Apex Bank, which is only an
instrumentality, insisting upon a representation
on the board is completely misconceived. There
is no particular requirement for the Apex Bank
to have a nominee on the board of the Federal
Society.
- 107 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
22.14. Proviso to subsection (2) of Section 28A
provides a minimum and maximum number of
members of the board and the composition
thereof. Clause (b) of the said proviso would
indicate that in case of all co-operative societies
other than non-agriculture credit co-operative
societies, if necessary an ex officio member and
nominee, from the financing or the credit
agency, could be included, in the composition of
the board within the permissible limits. Thus,
his submission is that such inclusion is only if
necessary, the necessity or otherwise, is to be
determined by the Society and not by the
Registrar.
22.15. The Statute does not mandate a compulsory
inclusion of the nominee from financing or the
credit agency, as an ex officio member of the
Board. Thus, he submits that the direction
issued by the Registrar that a nominee of the
Apex Bank cannot be removed and or the
- 108 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
presence of a nominee of the Apex Bank is
compulsory is contrary to the above provision.
He again reiterates that it is in the domain of
the Society to amend the Byelaws. There
cannot be any particular direction issued in that
regard, which has an impact of impinging upon
the democratic rights of the said Society. On
the basis of the above submission, he submits
that the petition as filed is required to be
allowed.
23. Smt.Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional
Advocate General appearing for the State would
submit that:
23.1. There is no time limit which is contained in
Section 12 of the KCS Act for the Registrar to
consider the proposed amendment forwarded
by a Society. The deeming fiction would not
arise or be applicable to such an amendment
proposed by the Society. Her submission is that
- 109 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
the time period specified under subsection (2)
of Section 12 of the KCS Act and the deeming
fiction under subsection (2)A of Section 12 of
KCS Act relates to subsection (1) of Section 12
thereof, which relates to a Co-operative Society
being mandated to make amendments to its
Byelaws in conformity with the amendments
made to the Act or the Rules from time to time
within 90 days from the date of coming into
force of the said amendment.
23.2. It is only in such circumstances, she submits
that the period of 90 days would apply and if an
order is not passed by the Registrar under
subsection (2)A of Section 12, the deeming
fiction would kick-in mandating that the
amendment proposed by the Society is deemed
to have been registered and come into
operation. Her submission is that this is on
account of the amendment dealt with in
subsection (1) of Section 12 is one which is
- 110 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
necessary to bring the Byelaws in conformity
with the provisions of the Act and the Rules
made thereunder and or any amendment to the
Act or the Rules from time to time. There being
a statutory requirement of Byelaws of the co-
operative society to confirm with the Act and
the Rules if a proposal is sent by the Society,
there is a mandate on the Registrar to consider
the same within 90 days; if not considered and
necessary orders passed, it is deemed to have
been accepted and registered.
23.3. She submits that this would not apply insofar as
the amendments voluntarily proposed by the
Society under subsection (2) of Section 12,
inasmuch as any amendment proposed by the
Society would not come into effect unless
approved by the Registrar and such approval is
on the satisfaction of the Registrar, that the
amendment is not contrary to the provision of
the Act and the Rules, does not conflict with the
- 111 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
co-operative principles, satisfies the
requirement of sound business, the amendment
promoting economic interests of the members
of the society, and the amendment not being
inconsistent with the principles of social justice.
23.4. Thus, any amendment proposed by the soceity
would have to stand the test of subsection (2)
of Section 12. If the same does not so stand
the test, the Registrar can reject the
amendment sought for.
23.5. This is a reasonable restriction which has been
imposed, on the society by the statute which
would not impinge upon Article 19(1)(c) of the
Constitution. It is exercising this power under
subsection (2) of Section 12 that the Registrar
has come to a conclusion that deletion of the
nominee of the Apex Bank would not be in the
interest of the Society. It will not promote the
economic interest of the members as also not
satisfy the requirement of sound business.
- 112 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Thus, she submits that the order passed by the
Registrar is in compliance with subsection (2) of
Section 12 and no fault can be found therewith.
23.6. By relying on Section 29-G(4)(j) of the KCS
Act, her submission is that a Director of a
Member society cannot file a writ petition. The
above provision would indicate that it is only
the Chief Executive Officer who is the Chief
Administrative Officer who can sue and be sued
in his name. The statute only grants such right
to the Chief Executive Officer or the Secretary,
and a Director would not come within the
purview of Section 29-G(4)(j). The present Writ
Petitions not having been filed by the Chief
Executive Officer or the Secretary, there is no
locus for the Director to file such a petition.
23.7. Insofar as the procedure to be followed by the
Society in respect of amendment, she submits
that such procedure is prescribed under Rule 6
and this procedure has not been followed by the
- 113 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Society. Notice of the proposed amendment is
required to be given to the members of the
society in accordance with the Byelaws. A copy
of the Resolution indicating the proposed
amendment is required to be forwarded along
with the notice and the agenda. In the present
case, in the notice as regards the meeting
proposed to be held on 6-11-2023, neither is
the subject of amendment mentioned nor is the
proposed amendment included in the
notice/agenda.
23.8. The aspect of the amendment was taken up as
other subject with the permission of the Chair.
The proposed amendment was not known to all
the members of the Federal Society. Without all
the members of the Federal Society being made
aware of the proposed amendment, such an
amendment could not have been taken up for
consideration, behind their back, put to vote
and passed by a lesser number of persons.
- 114 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
23.9. Her submission is that the Federal Society has
about 1129 member societies. It is only about
300 members who were present at the meeting
where the Resolution has been passed by the
majority of the members present. All 1129
members were not put to notice about the
proposed amendment. They being affected by
the amendment, notice ought to have been
issued to all the members of the proposed
amendment.
23.10. The aspect of amendment to the Byelaws going
to the root of the Constitution of the Co-
operative Society, the subject of amendment
could not be taken up for consideration by the
members present and voting behind the back of
all those members. If at all notice had been
issued, they would have represented in the
meeting and made their stand clear. Thus, a
mere passing of a resolution with two-thirds
majority among the members present and
- 115 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
voting without all the members being put on
notice of the proposed amendment does not
satisfy the requirement of either Rule 6 of the
KCS Rules or Section 12 of the KCS Act.
23.11. She relies on the judgment of this Court in the
case of Shri.Abdulla A.K., vs.
Nanjarayapatna Vyavasaya Seva6 more
particularly Para 28 thereof which is reproduced
hereunder for easy reference:
28. A reading of the said Section go to show that
though any employee of the Co-operative Society
irrespective of their designation can be called as
Chief Executive, but, for him to be called so, it must
be shown that he was discharging the functions of a
Chief Executive Officer under the Act, Rules or the
Bye-laws. However, neither any material has been
placed nor evidence has been led to the effect that
the previous post of Secretary was later converted
into the post of Manager of the plaintiff and the
same was subsequently re-designated as Chief
Executive. In the absence of any such pleading or
evidence and in the presence of the Bye-law, it
appears to have still retaining its Clause 18(A)(5)
holding that the Secretary alone shall sue on behalf
of the plaintiff, the argument of the learned counsel
for the respondent that the Secretary was the
Manager and himself has now designated as a Chief
Executive cannot be acceptable. Consequently, the
contention of the learned counsel for the appellant
AIR Online 2018 KAR 96
- 116 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
that the suit has instituted by the plaintiff, shown
as being represented by its Manager was not
maintainable as per the Bye-law of the plaintiff and
in the absence of any resolution of the plaintiff in
the General Body. As such, I answer the substantial
question of law No.1 in the negative.
23.12. By relying on Abdullah's case, she submits
that it is only a person who is designated and
appointed as a Chief Executive Officer who can
sue and be sued in the name of the Society. A
Director merely discharging managerial
functions will not be a Chief Executive within
the meaning of Section 29-G(4)(j) of the KCS
Act.
23.13. She relies on the judgment of this Court in the
case of Bharathi Souhardha Credit Co-
operative Limited vs. State of Karnataka7
more particularly Para 9 thereof, which is
reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
9. From the above provision of law, it is clear that
all legal proceedings are to be initiated only by the
2008 SCC Online KAR 469
- 117 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Chief Executive of the Co-operative Society under
the Act. During the course of arguments, it is fairly
conceded by the Petitioner's Counsel that there was
no disability for the Chief Executive to institute
legal proceedings. When there is a specific
provision under the Act, the Chief Executive cannot
delegate his power to the President to file the writ
petition and when there is no disability of
whatsoever nature for him to file the writ petition.
Therefore, only on this short ground the petition
filed by the Petitioner is to be dismissed. Be that as
it may. Even if the Court considers the case of the
Petitioner on merits also this Court cannot interfere
with the order passed by the 2nd respondent for
the following reasons:
It is not in dispute that the President of the
petitioner-Society as per Annexure-R3 has
addressed a letter on 2-7-2008 stating that on
account of difference of opinion between him and
other Directors and also on account of non-co-
operation of employees, the Society is unable to
continue to function and for the time being, the
work has been suspended and on account of the
same, there are every possibility of delay in
submitting the annual report to the 2nd respondent
and there are chances for postponement of
conducting the Annual General Meeting. From the
reading of Annexure-R3, it is clear that the
petitioner-Society, on account of internal dispute
was unable to manage the affairs of the Society in
accordance with the Act. When the President has
addressed a letter to the 2nd respondent and based
on the same, if the 2nd respondent has directed the
Chartered Accountant to verify the records and
submit a report in regard to the affairs of the
Society and based on such direction, when the
Chartered Accountant has submitted her report
about the violations made by the petitioner-Society
- 118 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
and when such report is not in dispute, this Court
does not see any error committed by the 2nd
respondent in appointing an Administrator. When
the petitioner-President is unable to manage the
affairs of the Society and if other Directors and
employees are not co-operating with him, in such
circumstances, the 2nd respondent has taken a
proper and just decision in superseding the
petitioner-Society.
23.14. By relying on Bharathi Souhardha Credit Co-
operative Limited's case, she submits that all
legal proceedings are to be initiated only by the
Chief Executive of the Co-operative Society.
There being a Chief Executive Officer of the
Petitioner's society appointed, a Director cannot
file the above petition.
23.15. She relies upon the decision of the Coordinate
Bench of this Court in the case of
Dr.Veerendra Teggimani vs. District
Registrar of Societies8, more particularly
Para 6 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder
for easy reference:
W.P.No.101894/2022 dtd 26.5.2022
- 119 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
6. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is satisfied
that the Petitioner has no locus standi to challenge
the impugned order dated 13.05.2022 at
Annexure-C issued by the respondent No.1-
District Registrar of Co-operative Societies.
23.16. By relying on Dr.Veerendra Teggimani's
case, she submits that the Director not having
any locus to file the petition on behalf of the
Society, there being no locus, this Court ought
to dismiss the above petition. Her further
submission is that the amendment is made to
the Federal Society, and not to the constituent
society like the Petitioner. As such, it is only the
Federal Society that can have any grievances,
not the member society like the Petitioner.
23.17. She relies on another decision of a Coordinate
Bench of this Court Gaddikeri Milk Producer
vs. State of Karnataka9 more particularly,
WP No.107266/2023 dtd 22.2.2024
- 120 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Para 15 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder
for easy reference:
15. As far as the prayer regarding direction to the
fifth respondent Union to increase the milk price, it
would be open to the petitioners to make an
appropriate representation in this regard and if
such a representation is made, the same shall be
considered by the fifth respondent Union in
accordance with law, after taking into consideration
all the relevant factors.
23.18. By relying on Gaddikeri Milk Producer Co-
operative Society's case, she submits that if
at all a constituent member has any grievance
as regards the amendment made to the
Byelaws of the Federal Society, the same would
have to be taken up with the Federal Society
and no independent challenge could be made in
relation thereto.
23.19. She relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Daman Singh
- 121 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
vs. State of Punjab10 more particularly Paras
3, 4, 11 and 14 thereof, which are reproduced
hereunder for easy reference:
3. The foremost submission of Shri M.K.
Ramamurthi, learned Counsel for the petitioners
was that any law providing for the amalgamation of
co-operative societies directly contravenes Article
19(1)(c) which guarantees to all citizens the right
to form associations or unions. According to Shri
Ramamurthi, the right of a citizen to form a society
or to be a member of a certain co-operative society
is interfered with if the society of which he has
become a member is amalgamated with another
society consisting of members with whom he may
not be willing to be associated. Article 31-(1)(c)
furnishes a complete answer to this submission. It
provides that no law providing for the
amalgamation of two or more corporations either in
the public interest or in order to secure the proper
management of any of the corporations shall be
deemed to be void on the ground that it is
inconsistent or takes away or abridges any of the
rights conferred by Article 14 or Article 19. Shri
Ramamurthi attempted to cross the stile by arguing
that co-operative societies were not corporations
within the meaning of that expression in Article 31-
A(1)(c). According to him, the Constitution
discloses a scheme which separates co-operative
societies from corporations, and "never the twain
shall meet". To substantiate his submission, he
invited our attention to Entries 43 and 44 of List I
and Entry 32 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to
the Constitution. He also read out to us the
Statement of Objects and Reasons and the Joint
Select Committee's Report relating to the
Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1955 by
which clause (c) of Article 31-A(1) was introduced.
His submission was that the legislative intent was
merely to render legislation providing for
amalgamation of companies and statutory
(1985) 2 SCC 670
- 122 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
corporations alone immune to challenge on the
ground of conflict with the fundamental rights
guaranteed by Articles 14 and 19. According to him
the protection afforded by Article 31-A(1)(c) was
not available and was never intended to be made
available to co-operative societies, since the
expression "corporations" did not comprehend co-
operative societies in its expanse.
4. We are unable to find any justification for giving
such a limited or narrow interpretation to the
expression "corporations" occurring in Article 31-
A(1)(c). On the other hand, we think that the very
requirement of public interest or proper
management of the corporation mentioned in
Article 31-A(1)(c) requires the expression to be
given a broad interpretation since there can be no
higher interest than the public interest. We do not
however desire to quibble with rules of construction
since we propose to examine what a "corporation"
means and comprehends ordinarily and in the
scheme of the Constitution.
11. The next submission of the learned Counsel
was that Section 13(8), (9) and (10) did not make
express provision for the issue of notice to the
members of the concerned co-operative societies
and were, therefore, violative of the principles of
natural justice. He argued that in the absence of
any provision, the rules of natural justice may be
read into the provisions and notice to the members
of the affected societies was imperative. Otherwise,
he argued, members of one society would be
formed against their will and without being heard to
associate themselves with members of another
society. We have no hesitation in rejecting this
submission also. Once a person becomes a member
of a co-operative society, he loses his individuality
qua the society and he has no independent rights
except those given to him by the statute and the
- 123 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
bye-laws. He must act and speak through the
society or rather, the society alone can act and
speak for him qua rights or duties of the society as
a body. So if the statute which authorises
compulsory amalgamation of co-operative societies
provides for notice to the societies concerned, the
requirement of natural justice is fully satisfied. The
notice to the society will be deemed as notice to all
its members. That is why Section 13(9)(a) provides
for the issue of notice to the societies and not to
individual members. Section 13(9)(b), however,
provides the members also with an opportunity to
be heard if they desire to be heard. Notice to
individual members of a co-operative society, in our
opinion, is opposed to the very status of a co-
operative society as a body corporate and is,
therefore, unnecessary. We do not consider it
necessary to further elaborate the matter except to
point out that a member who objects to the
proposed amalgamation within the prescribed time
is given, by Section 31(11), the option to walk out,
as it were, by withdrawing his share, deposits or
loans as the case may be.
14. Shri Arvind Kumar, learned Counsel for one of
the appellants very airily made a submission that
Article 31-A(1)(c) introduced by the Constitution
(Fourth Amendment) Act and Section 13(8) of the
Punjab Co-operative Societies Act offended the
basic structure of the Constitution as they affected
the dignity of the human being and were therefore
void. We find ourselves unable to appreciate how
the dignity of a human being can even remotely be
said to be affected by the amalgamation of a co-
operative society of which an individual is a
member with another co-operative society. We
expect Counsel appearing in this Court, particularly
when they appear before the Constitution Bench, to
avoid advancing such totally unsustainable
propositions. The time of this Court is public time
- 124 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
and as the mountainous arrears show the time is
becoming increasingly dear and precious. We can
only appeal to Counsel to carefully examine with a
greater sense of responsibility the submissions
which they propose to make before actually
advancing them in court. All the appeals are
dismissed with costs which we quantify each at Rs
2500 in each appeal.
23.20. By relying on Dhaman Singh's case, she
submits that the Hon'ble Apex Court has come
to a categorical conclusion that an order of the
Registrar directing the amalgamation of two or
more corporations cannot be said to be violative
of Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution,
recognising the right of the persons to form a
society. She further submits that once a person
becomes a member of a co-operative society,
he loses his individuality for the society, and he
has no independent right except those given to
him by the Statute and the Byelaws. Such a
person is to act and speak through the Society,
that is, the Society alone can act and speak for
- 125 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
such a person. The notice to the Society is
deemed to be notice to all members. On the
above basis, she submits that the direction
which has been issued by the Registrar to
retain a member of the nominee of the Apex
Bank is in the interest of the Co-operative
Society and its members. The Petitioner cannot
have any grievance in relation to that.
23.21. She relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of State of U.P. vs. COD.,
Cheokki Employees Co-operative Society
Ltd.,11 more particularly, Para 16 thereof,
which is reproduced hereunder for easy
reference:
16. Thus, it is settled law that no citizen has a
fundamental right under Article 19(1)(c) to become
a member of a Co-operative Society. His right is
governed by the provisions of the statute. So, the
right to become or to continue being a member of
the society is a statutory right. On fulfilment of the
qualifications prescribed to become a member and
for being a member of the society and on
(1997) 3 SCC 681
- 126 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
admission, he becomes a member. His being a
member of the society is subject to the operation of
the Act, rules and bye-laws applicable from time to
time. A member of the society has no independent
right qua the society and it is the society that is
entitled to represent as the corporate aggregate.
No individual member is entitled to assail the
constitutionality of the provisions of the Act, rules
and the bye-laws as he has his right under the Act,
rules and the bye-laws and is subject to its
operation. The stream cannot rise higher than the
source.
23.22. By relying on Cheokki's case, she submits that
no citizen has a fundamental right under Article
19(1)(c) to become a member of the co-
operative society. Such a right is governed by
the provisions of the Act/Statute, as only if the
qualifications are fulfilled that such a person
can become a member. No individual member
would be entitled to assail the constitutionality
of the provision of the Act, Rules and the
Byelaws as all his rights are conferred
thereunder and the member stream cannot rise
higher than the Society source would be
- 127 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
applicable. The Petitioner being a member
cannot seek to rise above the federal society.
23.23. She relies upon the decision of this Court in the
case of Prathamika Krushi Pattina Sahakara
vs. The Asst. Registrar12 more particularly
Para 23 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder
for easy reference:
23. In view of the above, I decline to exercise the
jurisdiction to entertain the petition which is filed
bypassing Section 106 of the Act, 1959, where
filing of appeal is provided against the order
passed under Section 12 of the Act, 1959. If this
Court proceeds to exercise jurisdiction even when
an alternative or efficacious remedy is available to
the parties under the statute, the appeal provision
provided under Section 106 of the Act, would
become redundant. I am of the opinion that the
Petitioner will have to file an appeal under Section
106 of the Act, 1959, if it is adviced to do so.
Hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed as not
maintainable."
23.24. By relying on Prathamika Krushi's case, she
submits that there is an alternative efficacy
remedy available in terms of appellate remedy
- 128 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
under Section 106. It is for the Petitioner to file
such an appeal and not agitate the matter
before this Court.
23.25. She relies upon the decision of this Court in the
case of Samaja Seva Sahakari Bank
Niyamitha vs. The State of Karnataka13
more particularly Para 2 thereof which is
reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
The impugned orders under challenge are
passed under Section 12 of the Karnataka Co-
operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act').
The impugned orders passed under Sections 12(5)
and 12(6) of the Act is with regard to replacing the
word 'Bank' by 'Sangha'. Any order passed under
Section 12 of the Act would be an appealable order,
under Section 106(1)(b) of the Act. As the statute
provides appeal against an order passed under
Section 12 of the Act, I decline to entertain the writ
petition. When statute provides for statutory
appeal, it may not be proper for this Court to
entertain the writ petition. Hence the writ petition is
disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to avail the
remedy of appeal under the Act.
10.19 Again by relying on Samaj Seva Sahakari Bank
Niyamita's case, she submits that any order
- 129 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
passed under Section 12(5) and 12(6) of the Act
is an appealable order under Section 106 (1)(b)
of the Act, and this Court ought not to entertain
the Writ Petition. In this regard, further reliance is
placed on the order dated 3.12.2020 of the
Division Bench of this Court in WA
No.100364/2024. Based on all the above, she
submits that both the petitions are required to be
dismissed.
24. Sri.Subramanya R., learned counsel appearing for
the intervenors in WP No.21521/2024 would seek to
support the State and the Registrar.
24.1. His submission is that the interveners being
societies functioning within the two new talukas
formed in Chikkaballapura District, it is required
that they be represented on the Board. The
petitioners do not wish to have them
represented and thereby the interest of the
- 130 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Societies functioning in the two new talukas is
adversely affected.
24.2. In this regard, he relies upon the decision of the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Taraganahalli Milk Producers Co-operative
Society & ors vs. State of Karnataka &
ors.,14 more particularly Paras 12, 13, and 16
thereof, which are reproduced hereunder for
easy reference:
12. Having taken note of the fact that the
respondent No.3-Union is situated in the land
belonging to the State Government on lease for a
sum of Rs.10,000/- as per the Government Order
dated 29th January, 2016 for a period of thirty
years, I am of the view that the assistance and the
involvement of State reflects in the administration
of the respondent No.3-Union. I have also noticed
that the State Government is releasing Rs.5/- per
litre at the instance of the State Government of
milk as an incentive to the milk suppliers and in this
regard, though there is no share capital with the
respondent No.3-Union by the respondent State,
but the suppliers of the milk are getting Rs.5/- per
litre, as well as the building has been leased out on
concessional rates and that apart, the respondent
No.3-Union has passed the Resolution in the
General Body Meeting held on 06th July, 2018 to
include the
- 131 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Government Nominee as one of the Members of the
Board and the said bye-law has been amended in
terms of Section 28- A(4B) of the Act where the
strength of the total members is 20 including the
nominee of the State and therefore, the petitioners
being members of respondent No.3-Union are
bound by the bye-laws and the Resolution passed
by the General Body and therefore, the petitioners
have not made out any case for interference in this
writ petition. At this juncture, it is relevant to refer
to the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of DAMAN SINGH
(supra), wherein at paragraph 11, it is observed
thus:
"The next submission of the learned counsel was
that s. 13 A (8), (9) and (10) did not make express
provision for the issue of notice to the members of
the concerned Co-operative Societies and were,
therefore, violative of the principles of natural
justice. He argued that in the absence of any
provision, the rules of natural justice may be read
into the provisions and notice to the members of
the affected societies was imperative. Otherwise,
he argued, members of one society would be
formed against their will and without being heard to
associate themselves with members of another
society. We have no hesitation in rejecting this
submission also. Once a person becomes a member
of a co-operative society, he loses his individuality
qua the society and he has no independent rights
except those given to him by the statute and the
by-laws. He must act and speak through the society
or rather, the society alone can act and speak for
him qua rights or duties of the society as a body,
So if the statute which authorises compulsory
amalgamation of co-operative societies provides for
notice to the societies concerned, the requirement
- 132 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
of natural justice is fully satisfied. The notice to the
society will be deemed as notice to all its member.
That is why S.13 (9) (a) Provides for the issue of
notice to the societies and not to individual
members. Section 13(9)(b), however, provides the
members also with an opportunity to be heard if
they desire to be heard. Notice to individual
members of a co-operative society, in our opinion,
is opposed to the very status of a co-operative
society as a body corporate and is, therefore,
unnecessary. We do not consider it necessary to,
further elaborate the matter except to point out
that a member who objects to the proposed
amalgamation within the prescribed time is given,
by S.31(11), the option to walk-out, as it were, by
withdrawing his share, deposits or loans as the case
may be."
13. Being a Member/President of the respondent
No.3- Union, which is an Associate Society and that
apart, the petitioners, being parties to the
Resolution dated 06th July,2018, cannot question
the Nomination of respondent No.4 to the
respondent No.3-Union by the respondent-
Government. The aforementioned judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of DAMAN SINGH
(supra) would squarely applicable to the facts on
hand, despite the fact that the, learned Senior
Counsel appearing for the petitioners argued that
petitioners have locus standi in view of Article
19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India. In fact, Article
19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India, whereby the
word [or co-operative societies] was incorporated
by way of Constitution (Ninety Seventh
Amendment) Act, 2011 with effect from 15th
February, 2012, which invariably protects the
interest of the respondent-Society and therefore,
writ petition does not survive for consideration. The
- 133 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
said aspect relating to taking ecision at the General
Body, including the nominee of the State
Government was recently considered in the case of
ALOKE KUMAR (supra), wherein at paragraphs 56,
57 and 61 of the judgment, it is observed thus:
"56. It is not in dispute that the General Body of
the Appellant Society, which is supreme, has taken
up a conscious decision to redevelop the
administrative building. The General Body of the
Appellant Society has also resolved to appoint the
Hi-Rise as the developer. Those decisions having
not been challenged at all, the Respondent No.1
being a member of the Appellant Society is bound
by the said decisions. The General Body of the
Appellant Society has approved the terms and
conditions of the development agreement by
overwhelming majority. Merely because the terms
and conditions of the development agreement are
not acceptable to the Respondent No.1, who could
be said to be in minuscule minority cannot be the
basis of not to abide by the decision of the
overwhelming majority of the General Body of the
Appellant Society. The redevelopment of the
property is necessitated in view of the fact that the
building is in a dilapidated condition with passage of
time. The redevelopment thus, in our view, would
be a requirement and a necessity and cannot be
termed as business. The Appellant Society in such
circumstances did not even require to carry out any
amendment to the bye-laws or to include the
"redevelopment of the buildings" as one of the
objects of the Society before taking any decision to
redevelop its property.
57. By now it is well established position that once
a person becomes a member of the Co-operative
- 134 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Society, he loses his individuality with the Society
and he has no independent rights except those
given to him by the statute and bye-laws. The
member has to speak through the Society or rather
the Society alone can act and speaks for him qua
the rights and duties of the Society as a body (see :
Daman Singh V. State of Punjab, reported in
(1985) 2 SCC 670 : AIR 1985 SC 973). This view
has been followed in the subsequent decision of this
Court in the case of State of U.P. v. Chheoki
Employees Co-operative Society Ltd., reported in
(1997) 3 SCC 681 :AIR 1997 SC 1413. In this
decision, this Court further observed that the
member of a Society has no independent right qua
the Society and it is the Society that is entitled to
represent as the corporate aggregate. This Court
also observed that the stream cannot rise higher
than the source. Suffice it to observe that so long
as the Resolutions passed by the General Body of
the Appellant Society are in force and not
overturned by a forum of competent jurisdiction,
the said decisions would bind the Respondent No.
1. He cannot be permitted to take a stand alone
position but is bound by the majority decision of the
General Body. Notably, the Respondent No. 1 has
not challenged the Resolutions passed by the
General Body of the Appellant Society to redevelop
the property and more so, to appoint the Hi-Rise as
the Developer to give him all the redevelopment
rights.
61. In the overall view of the matter, we are
convinced that the impugned judgment and order
passed by the High Court is not sustainable in law
and deserves to be set aside. At one point of time,
we were inclined to allow this appeal by imposing
an exemplary costs on the Respondent No. 1 for
unnecessarily dragging the Appellant Society into a
frivolous litigation & not allowing the Appellant
- 135 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Society to go ahead with the project for the past
almost two decades. However, we refrain from
passing such order of costs in the hope that the
Respondent No. 1 realises that the development of
the administrative building will be for the
betterment of the society. No individual member is
going to gain anything from the redevelopment. It
is the society as an autonomous body which will
gain something."
16. In view of the submission made by the learned
Senior Counsel for the petitioners, I have carefully
examined the order passed in Writ Petition
No.20715 of 1999, wherein the said judgment is
not applicable to the facts of the present case, as
the respondent No.3-Union had taken the premises
on lease in question for a period of thirty years on
concession rate as per Government Order dated
29th January, 2016 and the bye-laws of the
respondent No.3-Union was amended on 06th July
2018 and therefore, the aforementioned Judgment
is not applicable to the facts of the case on hand.
The learned Senior Counsel placed reliance on the
Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of
GANAPATHY SEETHARAM BHAT (supra). In the
present case, there is direct assistance by the State
by providing incentive of Rs.5/- per litre to the milk
suppliers, as well as the premises of the Society
being taken on concession rate by the respondent
No.3-Union, would make it clear that the State
Government is having pervasive control over the
affairs of the respondent No.3-Union herein and
therefore, the aforementioned case is not applicable
to the facts of the present case. In the result, writ
petition is dismissed as devoid of merits.
- 136 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
24.3. By relying on Taraganalli Milk Producers Co-
operative Society, he submits that the
requirement of a representative of the
Government is required for properly and
effectively administering the co-operative
society. Such inclusion will not be violative of
Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution.
24.4. He relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in State of U.P. v. C.O.D. Chheoki
Employees' Coop. Society Ltd.,15 , more
particularly Paragraphs 16 and 17 thereof,
which are reproduced hereunder for easy
reference:
16. Thus, it is settled law that no citizen has a
fundamental right under Article 19(1)(c) to
become a member of a Co-operative Society. His
right is governed by the provisions of the statute.
So, the right to become or to continue being a
member of the society is a statutory right. On
fulfilment of the qualifications prescribed to
become a member and for being a member of the
society and on admission, he becomes a member.
His being a member of the society is subject to the
operation of the Act, rules and bye-laws applicable
from time to time. A member of the society has no
independent right qua the society and it is the
(1997) 3 SCC 681
- 137 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
society that is entitled to represent as the
corporate aggregate. No individual member is
entitled to assail the constitutionality of the
provisions of the Act, rules and the bye-laws as he
has his right under the Act, rules and the bye-laws
and is subject to its operation. The stream cannot
rise higher than the source.
17. So, the society having been formed is
governed by the provisions of the Act. The
individual members do not have any fundamental
right to the management of the Committee except
in accordance with the provisions of the Act, rules
and bye-laws. The management of the Committee
is regulated by Section 29 of the Act. The
composition thereof is also regulated by the Act
and has to be in accordance with the Rules and the
bye-laws. The Rules referred to hereinbefore have
to be in furtherance of and in conformity with the
provisions contained in Section 130(2)(xii) and
(xii-A) and the Rules providing for reservation in
the election of the Committee or for nomination to
the Management Committee of the members
belonging to the weaker sections and women
should be to effectuate socio-economic and
political justice assured by the Preamble, Articles
38 and 46 of the Constitution.
24.5. By relying on Chheoki Employee Co-
operative Society which has also been relied
upon by the Additional Advocate General, he
submits that the petitioners cannot seek to
have a particular class of directors to be
included in the byelaws at the cost of the
interveners who are operating in a newly
- 138 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
formed taluka. His submission, therefore, is
that the petitioners in the above matters do not
have the locus to file and or maintain the
present petition.
24.6. He relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of Bengal Secretariat Coop.
Land Mortgage Bank & Housing Society
Ltd. v. Aloke Kumar16, more particularly
Paras 56, 57 and 58, thereof which are
reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
56. It is not in dispute that the General Body of
the Appellant Society, which is supreme, has taken
up a conscious decision to redevelop the
administrative building. The General Body of the
Appellant Society has also resolved to appoint the
Hi-Rise as the developer. Those decisions having
not been challenged at all, the Respondent No. 1
being a member of the Appellant Society is bound
by the said decisions. The General Body of the
Appellant Society has approved the terms and
conditions of the development agreement by
overwhelming majority. Merely because the terms
and conditions of the development agreement are
not acceptable to the Respondent No. 1, who could
be said to be in minuscule minority cannot be the
basis of not to abide by the decision of the
overwhelming majority of the General Body of the
Appellant Society. The redevelopment of the
property is necessitated in view of the fact that the
2022 SCC Online SC 1404
- 139 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
building is in a dilapidated condition with passage
of time. The redevelopment thus, in our view,
would be a requirement and a necessity and
cannot be termed as business. The Appellant
Society in such circumstances did not even require
to carry out any amendment to the bye-laws or to
include the "redevelopment of the buildings" as
one of the objects of the Society before taking any
decision to redevelop its property.
57. By now it is well established position that once
a person becomes a member of the Co-operative
Society, he loses his individuality with the Society
and he has no independent rights except those
given to him by the statute and bye-laws. The
member has to speak through the Society or
rather the Society alone can act and speaks for
him qua the rights and duties of the Society as a
body (see : Daman Singh v. State of Punjab,
reported in (1985) 2 SCC 670 : AIR 1985 SC 973).
This view has been followed in the subsequent
decision of this Court in the case of State of U.P v.
Chheoki Employees Co-operative Society Ltd.,
reported in (1997) 3 SCC 681 : AIR 1997 SC 1413.
In this decision, this Court further observed that
the member of a Society has no independent right
qua the Society and it is the Society that is entitled
to represent as the corporate aggregate. This
Court also observed that the stream cannot rise
higher than the source. Suffice it to observe that
so long as the Resolutions passed by the General
Body of the Appellant Society are in force and not
overturned by a forum of competent jurisdiction,
the said decisions would bind the Respondent No.
1. He cannot be permitted to take a stand alone
position but is bound by the majority decision of
the General Body. Notably, the Respondent No. 1
has not challenged the Resolutions passed by the
General Body of the Appellant Society to redevelop
the property and more so, to appoint the Hi-Rise
as the Developer to give him all the redevelopment
rights.
58. It was also argued on behalf of the
Respondent No. 1 that the property is in a good
condition and there is no need to redevelop the
- 140 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
existing building. In the first place, as noted
earlier, the decision of the General Body of the
Society to redevelop the subject property has not
been challenged at all. Besides, no provision in the
Co-operative Societies Act or the rules or any
other legal provision has been brought to our
notice which would curtail the right of the Society
to redevelop the property when the General Body
of the Society intends to do so. Essentially, that is
the commercial wisdom of the General Body of the
Society. It is not open to the Court to sit over the
said wisdom of the General Body as an Appellate
Authority. Merely because one single member in
minority disapproves of the decision, that cannot
be the basis to negate the decision of the General
Body, unless it is shown that the decision was the
product of fraud or misrepresentation or was
opposed to some statutory prohibition. That is not
the grievance made before us. In the present case,
the General Body took a conscious decision after
due deliberations for many years to redevelop its
property. Even with regard to the appointment of
the "Hi-Rise" as the Developer, the record shows
that it was decided by the General Body of the
Society after examining the relative merits of the
proposals received from the developers.
24.7. By relying on Aloke Kumar's case, he again
submits that once a person becomes a member
of the Co-operative society, he loses his
individuality. A member cannot agitate any
right before the Court. Any contention and or
opinion of the member would have to be placed
for consideration in the meeting of the society.
- 141 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
On the above basis, he submits, that the writ
petitions are required to be dismissed.
25. In reply, Sri Jayakumar S. Patil, learned Senior
Counsel, would submits that
25.1. Section 12 of the KCS Act has undergone
several amendments. Section 12, as it
originally stood, was as under:
12. Amendment of bye-laws of a co-operative
society. (1) No amendment of any bye-law of a
cooperative society shall be valid unless such
amendment has been registered under this Act.
(2) Every proposal for such amendment shall be
forwarded to the Registrar and if the Registrar is
satisfied that the proposed amendment -
(i) is not contrary to the provisions of this Act
and the rules;
(ii) does not conflict with co-operative
principles;
(iii) satisfies the requirements of sound
business;
(iv) will promote the economic interests of he
members of the society; and
(v) is not inconsistent with the principles of
social justice;
he may register the amendment.
(3) The Registrar shall forward to the society a
copy of the registered amendment together with a
- 142 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
certificate signed by him, and such certificate shall be
conclusive evidence that the amendment has been
duly registered.
(4) Where the Registrar refuses to register an
amendment of the bye-laws of a co-operative society,
he shall communicate the order of refusal, together
with the reasons therefore to the society.
[(5) If it appears to the Registrar that any
amendment of the bye-laws of a co-operarive society
is necessary or desirable in the interes of such
society, he Registrar may, by order, call upon the co-
operative society, to make the amendment proposed
by him in such manner as may be prescribed and
within such time as he may specify.
(6) If such amendment is not made by the co-
operative society within the time specified in the said
order, not withstanding anything contained in the Act,
the Registrar may, after given the co-operative
society an opportunity of being heard, register the
said amendment and forward a copy thereof to the
co-operative society along with a certificate signed by
him which shall be conclusive evidence that the
amendment has been fully registered].
25.2. Subsection (1) of Section 12 originally only
indicated that no amendment of any byelaw of
a co-operative society shall be valid unless such
amendment has been registered under the Act.
The said provision was amended by way of the
Karnataka Co-operative Society's Amendment
- 143 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Act 2012 which received the assent of the
Governor on 10.1.2013.
25.3. The amendment to Section 12, by virtue of
Section 6 of the Amendment Act, is as under:
6. Amendment of section 12.- In section
12 of the Principal Act,-
(i) for sub-section (1), the following shall
be substituted, namely:-
"(1) A cooperative society may amend its
bye-laws in conformity with the provisions
of this Act, and the rules made there under
from time to time.
Provided that every cooperative society
shall make amendments to its bye-laws in
conformity with the amendments made to
this Act or the rules from time to time
within ninety days from the date of coming
into force of the said amendments."
(ii)sub-sections (5) and (6) shall be
omitted.
25.4. The said Section 12 was amended by the
Karnataka Co-operative Societies Amendment
Act 1997, which received the assent of the
Governor on 1-7-1998. The amendment made
- 144 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
to Section 12 was in terms of Section 8 of the
Amendment Act, which is reproduced hereunder
for easy reference:
8. Amendment of Section 12:- In
section 12 of the Principal Act,-
(1) in sub-section (2), for the words
"he may register the amendment", the words
"he shall, within a period of three months
from the date of receipt of the proposal,
register the amendment" shall be
substituted;
(2) after sub-section (2), the following
sub-section shall be inserted, namely:-
"(2A) If the Registrar is unable to
dispose of such application within the period
specified in sub-seciton (1) the amendment
of bye-laws shall be deemed to have been
registered";
(3) for sub-section (3), the following
shall be substituted, namesly:-
"(3) When the Registrar registers an
amendment of the bye-laws of a society or
where an amendment of the bye-laws is
deemed to have been registered, he shall
issue to the society a copy of amendment
certified by him and such certificate shall be
conslusive evidence that the amendment of
the bye-law has been duly registered or
deemed to be registered as the case may
be".
25.5. By way of this amendment, in the end of
subsection (2), for the words, "he may register
the amendment", "he shall within a period of
- 145 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
three months from the date of receipt of the
proposal, register the amendment" was
substituted. Thus, he submits that the period of
90 days was included in subsection 2, vide the
Amendment Act of 1997. Subsection 2A also
came to be included by way of such
amendment in furtherance of which the
deeming provision was introduced and under
such deeming provision, if the Registrar was
unable to dispose of such application within the
period specified in subsection (1), the
amendment of byelaw shall be deemed to have
been registered. Thus, he submits that the
deeming provision is with respect to the time
period inserted by way of the Amendment Act
of 1997 in subsection (2) since as on that date
subsection (1) had not been amended and
there was no time period prescribed in
subsection (1) for a deeming provision to apply.
- 146 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
25.6. There is an error/mistake of the draftsman by
referring to subsection (1), in the newly
introduced subsection 2A, when it ought to
have been subsection (2). This mistake he
submits has probably occurred on account of
the amendment to subsection (2) by subsection
(1) of Section 8 of the Amendment Act. This
error he submits cannot now be contended to
relate only to subsection (1), which was
amended only in the year 2013 but ought to be
taken into consideration as regard the Statute
as it stood in the year 1997 by way of the
amendment vide Amendment Act, 1997.
25.7. Section 12 underwent a further amendment by
the Karnataka Co-operative Society's
Amendment Act, 2012 which received the
assent of the Governor on 10-1-2013. Section 6
of the said Amendment Act is reproduced
hereunder for easy reference:
- 147 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
6. Amendment of section 12:- In Section
12 of the Principal Act.-
(i) for sub-section (1), the following shall be
substituted, namely:-
"(1) A cooperative society may amend its
bye-laws in conformity with the provisions of
this Act, and the rules made there under
from time to time.
Provided that every cooperative society
shall make amendments to its bye-laws in
conformity with the amendments made to
this Act or the rules from time to time within
ninety days from the date of coming into
force of the said amendments"
(ii) sub-sections (5) and (6) shall be
omitted."
25.8. It is only in the year 2013 that subsection (1) of
section 12 came to be amended incorporating a
timeline of 90 days for the society to amend its
byelaws to bring in conformity with the
provision of the KCS Act and KCS Rules as
amended from time to time. This time period
introduced by way of amendment to subsection
(1) of Section 12 in the year 2013 is distinct
from the time period introduced to the
amendment to subsection (2) of Section 12 in
the year 1997 and as such, the deeming
provision under subsection 2A relates to the
- 148 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
amended subsection (2) of Section 12 and not
to amended subsection (1) of Section 12 and as
such, the period of the deeming fiction has
kicked in 90 days after the forwardal of the
proposal of amendment to the Registrar.
25.9. According to him the amendment having been
forwarded on 7-11-2023, the period of 90 days
expired on 6-2-2024, no order of rejection
having been passed by the Registrar; the
amendment is deemed to have been approved
by the Registrar requiring the same to be
registered. Once the said amendment is
deemed to be registered, the question of the
Registrar rejecting the proposed amendment
sent by a society, and recommending a
different amendment would not arise.
26. Smt.Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional
Advocate General, in rejoinder, would fairly submit,
that:
- 149 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
26.1. An error occurred in the arguments on account
of the printing of the Statute in the Bare acts
and books available. Now that the nature and
manner of amendment has been explained,
which could not have been gathered on a
reading of the Bare Act, if not for the
Amendment Acts having been produced by the
learned Senior counsel and draftman's error
being pointe out. She submits that even the
order passed by the Registrar on 20.2.2024 is
within the period of 90 days, inasmuch as
though the letter of the petitioners is dated 7-
11-2023, the same was received by the
Registrar only on 5-12-2023. Thus, the order of
rejection passed on 20-2-2024 is within the
period of 90 days.
26.2. In this regard, she places reliance on the said
letter produced at Annexure-C in WP
No.22271/2020, which bears the seal of receipt
with the date indicating 5-12-2023 with the
- 150 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Inward No. 3859. Thus, she submits that the
receipt of the said document was only on 5-12-
2023 and not on 7-11-2023.
26.3. In this regard, she relies upon the prayer and
the pleadings made by the petitioners in WP
No.22271/2024 to contend that even the
petitioners have referred to the said letter as
dated 7-11-2023/5-12-2023, that the
petitioners themselves having accepted, that
the letter has been submitted only on 5-12-
2023 even though dated 7-11-2023.
26.4. She submits that the references made to the
said letter in the correspondence issued by the
offices of the respondents, is with reference to
the date of the letter and not the date of
receipt. Thus, the reference to 7-11-2023 in
those letters would not mean that the letters
had been received on 7-11-2023. The same
would have to be ascertained on the basis of
the seal affixed on the said letter indicating the
- 151 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
date of receipt to be 5-12-2023. She therefore
submits that the deeming fiction under
subsection (2A) of Section 12 would not enure
to the benefit of the petitioners.
27. Heard Shri Jayakumar S. Patil, learned Senior
Counsel for the Petitioner in WP No.21521/2024, Shri
M. R. Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel for the
Petitioner in WP No.22271/2024, Shri Subramanya
R, learned Senior counsel for the intervenor in WP
No.21521/2024, Smt. Prathima Honnapura, learned
Additional Advocate General for the State in all the
above matters and perused papers.
28. The points that would arise for determination are:
1. Whether the petition filed by a Director
of the Co-operative Society and not by
the Chief Executive Officer of the Co-
operative Society in terms of Section
29-G(4)(j) of the KCS Act maintainable?
2. Whether a Director of a Primary Society
can maintain a writ petition concerning
the actions and amendments of a
Federal Society, especially when the
Federal Society itself is not a petitioner?
- 152 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
3. Should the petitioner have availed of the
statutory appellate remedy under
Section 106 of the Karnataka Co-
operative Societies Act, 1959 before
approaching the High Court under
Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution?
4. Whether there is a deeming fiction
available under subsection (2A) of
Section 12 of the KCS Act in respect of
amendments proposed by the society, if
not rejected by the Registrar within a
period of 90 days from such receipt, or
does the deeming fiction under
subsection (2A) only relate to
subsection (1) of Section 12?
5(a) Was the Registrar's rejection of the
amendment resolution proper and
within his powers under Section 12(2)?
Did the Registrar validly conclude that
the amendments were inconsistent with
the Act, Rules, or co-operative
principles?
5(b) Does the removal of the Apex Bank
nominee and others to accommodate
new Taluka representation violate
statutory or cooperative principles, and
do such decisions lie within the
exclusive domain of the Society or are
subject to State oversight?
- 153 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
6(a)In light of the 97th Constitutional
Amendment and Article 43B, whether
the Registrar's direction to reverse the
Society's democratically passed
resolution (to include representation for
newly formed Talukas by removing
certain categories) constitutes
impermissible interference in the
autonomous and democratic functioning
of co-operative societies?
6(b) Whether the Registrar's actions infringe
on the right to form and operate co-
operative societies freely, including
their internal governance decisions,
especially after the 97th Amendment?
6(c)Would the State have the power to
regulate a Co-operative Society
pursuant to the 97th Amendment to the
Constitution, introducing Article
19(1)(c) and Article 43B in the
Constitution of India?
7(a) Was proper notice, agenda, and
communication of the proposed
amendments given to all members, and
was the resolution passed by the
required quorum and procedure?
7(b) Does non-compliance with procedural
requirements invalidate the
- 154 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
amendment, regardless of majority
support at the meeting?
7(c) Whether the Resolution dated
6.11.2023 approving the amendment is
violative of Rule 6 of the KCS Rules on
account of notice relating to the
proposed amendment not having been
issued to all the members and the
proposed amendment not being
contained in the agenda of the meeting?
8. Are the impugned actions (rejection of
amendment, directions to modify bye-
laws) legally valid and require quashing
through a writ of certiorari?
9. What Order?
29. I answer the above points as under:
30. Answer to Point No.1: Whether the petition
filed by a Director of the Co-operative Society
and not by the Chief Executive Officer of the
Co-operative Society in terms of Section 29-
G(4)(j) of the KCS Act maintainable?
30.1. The contention of Smt.Prathima Honnapura,
learned Additional Advocate General is that WP
No.21521/2024 having been filed by the
- 155 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Primary Cooperative Society represented by its
Director, WP No.22271/2024 having been filed
by the Primary Cooperative Society represented
by its Director and WP No.23570/2024 filed by
the Primary Cooperative Society represented by
the respective President is not maintainable.
Her submission is that a Director or a President
cannot represent a Cooperative Society. A
Cooperative Society can sue or be sued only
through the Chief Executive Officer and in this
regard, she relies upon Section 29G4(J) of the
KCS Act.
30.2. Section 29G4(j) is reproduced hereunder for
easy reference:
29G.- Appointment of Chief Executive:-
(4) The Chief Executive shall be the Chief Administrative
Officer of the society and shall, subject to the general
supervision and control of the [board] and such other
conditions and restrictions as may be specified in the bye-
laws.-
(j) sue and be sued on behalf of the co-operative society;
- 156 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
30.3. A perusal of the above provision would indicate
that the Chief Executive Officer shall be the
Chief Administrative Officer of the Society and
shall subject to the general supervision and
control of the Board and such other conditions
and restrictions as may be specified in the
bylaws, sue and be sued on behalf of the
Cooperative Society.
30.4. That the powers which could be exercised by
the Chief Executive under subsection (4) of
Section 29G being the Chief Administrative
Officer shall be subject to the general
supervision and control of the Board. The Chief
Executive Officer cannot exercise any powers
dehors or contra the instructions of the Board.
30.5. Though the submission of Smt.Prathima
Honnapura, Additional Advocate General, is that
the petitions have to be filed by the Chief
Executive Officer, and not by a Director or
President. What would have to be also seen is
- 157 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
that a Board resolution has been produced by
the respective petitioners, authorizing the
respective persons who have filed the petition
to file such petition. That is to say, the petition
has not been filed by the Director or President
individually but has been filed under the
instructions and authority of the Board.
30.6. The powers of the Chief Executive Officer, as
indicated above, being subject to the
supervision of the Board, the filing of any
proceedings could also be subject to the
supervision of the Board. The Board in the
present matter has thought it fit to appoint the
Director and or the President to represent and
prosecute the matter. In that view of the
matter, I am of the considered opinion that the
requirements of Section 29G4(j) of the KCS Act
would not be applicable to a situation where the
Board itself has authorized a Director or
President to file or defend any proceedings.
- 158 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
30.7. In that view of the matter, I answer Point No.1
by holding that a Chief Executive Officer can,
without any further authorization, file any
proceedings, suit, etc. on behalf of the Society.
However, the same would not preclude a
Director or any other officer of the Cooperative
Society from filing any suit or proceedings, so
long as such filing is accompanied by a Board
resolution authorizing such person to file the
suit or proceedings. Needless to say that this
would also apply to defending a suit or
proceedings.
31. Answer to Point No.2: Whether a Director of a
Primary Society can maintain a writ petition
concerning the actions and amendments of a
Federal Society, especially when the Federal
Society itself is not a petitioner?
31.1. The submission of Smt.Prathima Honnapura,
learned Additional Advocate General is that in
the present matter challenge is made to the
- 159 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
amendment to the bylaws of the Federal
Society. Thus, it is only the Federal Society who
can challenge the amendment and not a
Primary Society who is a member of the Federal
Society.
31.2. Sri. Jayakumar S. Patil learned senior counsel
by relying upon Rustom Cavasjee Cooper's
case has contended that technical aspects
ought not to come in the way of rendering
substantial justice inasmuch as the amendment
to the Federal Society would have a bearing
and impact on the Petitioner who is a member
of the Federal Society. The affected party being
the members, since the constituencies have
been demarcated by way of the amendment
and such demarcation affecting the petitioner,
they could file the present writ petition.
31.3. The submission of Sri. M.R.Rajagopal, learned
senior counsel is also similar. He has relied
upon Ghulam Qadir's case to contend that
- 160 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
even a member of the Society, of a Federal
Society, would have a right to agitate any
grievance as regards the composition of the
governing body of the Federal Society. In my
considered opinion, the Hon'ble Apex Court in
both R.C.Cooper's case as also in Ghulam
Qadir's case has dealt with the above point.
More particularly, the Hon'ble Apex Court in
Ghulam Qadir's case has categorically stated
that the orthodox rule of interpretation
regarding locus standi of a person has
undergone a sea change. The Constitutional law
having developed in such a manner as to
provide remedy to any wronged party. This
Court would have to be liberal in applying the
concept of locus standi.
31.4. As held in answer to Point No.1, it is not an
individual who has come before this Court, but
the entire Board of the Primary Societies has
authorized a Director or President to file the
- 161 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
above proceedings. Thus, the petitioners who
are before this Court are primary societies on
the basis of a resolution passed by the Board,
and they are before this Court to seek redressal
of alleged wrongs. Whether or not there was a
wrong committed by the respondents will be
dealt with later. However, in my considered
opinion, the Petitioners who are various Primary
Cooperative Societies, cannot be stopped at the
door and stopped from agitating their
grievances. What is in issue is the composition
of the governing body of the Federal Society as
regards which elections would have to be held
wherein the petitioners could participate and
vote. It may also be that some of the
representatives and or delegates of the
Petitioners would form part of the governing
body of the Federal Society. There would also
be a requirement for the Federal Society to co-
operate and act with the Primary Co-operative
- 162 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Societies like the Petitioners. The 97th
amendment to the Constitution inserted Article
43B in the Constitution. The said Article 43B
reads as under:
43B. Promotion of co-operative societies- The
State shall endeavour to promote voluntary
formation, autonomous functioning,
democratic control and professional
management of co-operative Societies.
31.5. Article 43B imposes an obligation on the part of
the State to encourage the formation of Co-
operative Societies and to encourage efficient
management thereof. Article 43B recognises
the independence and autonomy of the Co-
operative Society as also the right of
participation in democratic process. In that
view of the matter, I am of the considered
opinion that the Primary Society who is a
member of the Federal Society would be
affected by any change in the composition of
the governing body of the Federal Society, and
- 163 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
as such can have a grievance as regards the
manner of change of composition of the
governing body which it would be entitled to
race and agitate before this Court.
31.6. The Federal Society now not having a Board,
but being represented by an Administrator, I
am of the considered opinion that the
Administrator cannot substitute the elected
representatives. The Primary Societies being
the electoral college from which the Board
would have to be elected, the grievance of the
Primary Co-operative Societies, would have to
be considered.
31.7. Hence, I answer Point No.2 by holding that a
Director by himself of a Primary Society cannot
maintain a Writ Petition, but a Director acting
on the authorisation of the Board of Directors of
a Primary Society can maintain a Writ Petition
concerning the actions of and amendments to
the bylaws of the Federal Society, even though
- 164 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
the Federal Society has not come forward to
challenge any such amendment, so long as
there is no Board of Directors functioning of
such Federal Society. Needless to say, if there
is a Board of Directors of the Federal Society
elected and functioning, then a member, like a
Primary Society or otherwise of the Federal
Society cannot maintain any Writ Petition as
regards amendment to the bylaws of the
Federal Society. Their grievance would have to
be addressed in any meeting of the Federal
Society they having a right to vote on any
proposal of amendment.
32. Answer to Point No.3: Should the petitioner
have availed of the statutory appellate remedy
under Section 106 of the Karnataka Co-
operative Societies Act, 1959 before
approaching the High Court under Articles 226
and 227 of the Constitution?
32.1. Smt.Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional
Advocate General would submit that the order
- 165 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
which has been passed in the present matter
approving the amendment under subsection (6)
of Section 12 is an appealable order and an
appeal as regards any order passed under
Section 12 subject to the provision of Section
108A is appealable under Section 106(1)(b).
She submits that requirements of Section 108A
not being attracted which require previous
sanction of the Reserve Bank, an order passed
under Section 12 whether it is a direction under
subsection (5) of Section 12 or a confirmatory
order under subsection (6) of Section 12, can
only be challenged in an appeal under Section
106 and not by way of a Writ Petition.
32.2. Both Sri.Jayakumar S.Patil, learned Senior
Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri M.
R. Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel appearing
for certain other petitioners, submit that though
the remedy under Section 106 may be an
alternate remedy, the same is not efficacious
- 166 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
since there are several issues which have been
raised, in the present petition which require
consideration by this Court and the same
cannot be considered in an appeal under
Section 106.
32.3. There is substance in the submission made by
Smt.Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional
Advocate General inasmuch as Section
106(1)(b) categorically provides for an
appellate remedy as regards any order passed
under Section 12. The said provision does not
distinguish between a voluntary amendment
and or an amendment carried out in pursuance
of the direction of the Registrar. Any
amendment if allowed or disallowed would be
an order if voluntarily under subsection (3) of
Section 12 and if involuntary under subsection
(6) of Section 12. Thus, any order passed under
Section 12 is amenable to an appellate remedy
under Section 106. However, taking into
- 167 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
consideration that arguments have been
advanced in this matter on several days and
the matter has been pending before this Court
for nearly a year, the elections of the Society
being proposed to be held in a month's time, I
am of the considered opinion that in the
peculiarity of the facts of the present matter, it
would not be in the ends of justice to relegate
the petitioners to the appellate remedy under
Section 106 and as such, in the interest of
justice, taking into consideration that the larger
interest would be affected by any delay, I am of
the considered opinion that the present
petitions are required to be held maintainable
and dealt with.
32.4. Hence, I answer Point No.3 by holding that any
order passed under Section 12, whether on the
basis of a voluntary amendment submitted by a
Society to the Registrar for approval, accepted
or rejected by the Registrar, or as regards an
- 168 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
order passed by the Registrar registering an
amendment in pursuance of a direction issued
under subsection (5) of Section 12 by passing
an order under subsection (6) of Section 12,
can only be challenged in an appeal under
Section 106 of the KCS Act, 1959 and it is only
in exceptional circumstances, that the power
and authority of this Court under 226 and 227
of the Constitution can be exercised in respect
of such orders under Section 12 of the KCS Act,
1959.
33. Answer to Point No.4: Whether there is a
deeming fiction available under subsection (2A)
of Section 12 of the KCS Act in respect of
amendments proposed by the society, if not
rejected by the Registrar within a period of 90
days from such receipt, or does the deeming
fiction under subsection (2A) only relate to
subsection (1) of Section 12?
33.1. Much argument has been advanced on the
deeming fiction available under subsection (2A)
of Section 12. Sri Jayakumar S. Patil learned
senior counsel categorically contending that a
- 169 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
general meeting was held on 6-11-2023 and
resolution passed approving the amendment,
which was forwarded to respondent No.2 on
7-11-2023. The said amendment requested of
by the Society, not having been considered by
the JRCS within a period of 90 days from the
date of receipt thereof, the amendment sent is
deemed to have been accepted and as such,
subsequent thereto, the Registrar cannot
thereafter pass any orders to the contrary and
or direct the Petitioner to carry out any other
amendment then that directed.
33.2. The submission of Smt.Prathima Honnapura,
learned Additional Advocate General being to
the contrary contending that there is no such
deeming fiction under Section 12 in respect of
an amendment or the bylaws submitted under
subsection (2) of Section 12. The deeming
fiction under subsection (2A) being only
applicable to subsection (1) of Section 12.
- 170 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
33.3. The manner of arguments which have been
advanced, and the applicable law have been
dealt with in detail hereinabove. The arguments
on part of the learned Additional Advocate
General arises out of a draftsman error in the
amendment to Section 12 made on 15-8-1998
and subsequent amendment to subsection (1)
of Section 12 in the year 2013. The perusal of
subsection (1) of Section 12 before the
amendment in the year 2013 would
categorically indicate that there is no such time
restriction as provided in the proviso to
subsection (1) of Section 12 in the original
subsection (1) of Section 12.
33.4. There has been an insertion made at the end of
subsection (2) of Section 12 by the Amendment
Act of 25 of 1998 adding "he shall, within a
period of three months from the date of receipt
of the proposal, register the amendment". At
the same time, by the very same amendment,
- 171 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Act No.25 of 1998, subsection (2A) to Section
12 has been inserted, which reads, "If the
Registrar is unable to dispose of such
application within the period specified in
subsection (1), the amendment of bye-laws
shall be deemed to have been registered".
33.5. It is by reference to the addition to clause (v) of
subsection (2) of Section 12 and the insertion
of subsection (2A) to Section 12 that Sri
Jayakumar S. Patil contends that these two
have to be read in harmony and the period of
three months is required to be complied with by
the Registrar in considering the proposal for
amendment and if the same is not disposed
within 90 days, the deeming fiction of the
amendment to bylaws being deemed to have
been registered would kick in.
33.6. The submission of Smt.Prathima Honnapura,
learned Additional Advocate General was that
subsection (2A) refers to subsection (1) and
- 172 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
therefore the same refers to subsection (1) of
Section 12, which only deals with an
amendment to bring the bylaws in conformity
with the provision of the Act. Thus, her
submission was that the present amendment
not being an amendment to bring the bylaws in
conformity with the provision of the Act,
subsection (1) of Section 12 would not be
applicable. Therefore, the deeming fiction under
subsection (2A) of Section 12 would not be
applicable.
33.7. This argument of the learned Additional
Advocate General on the first blush is required
to be accepted. However, Sri Jayakumar S.
Patil, learned senior counsel with his rich
experience, has placed on record the original
Section 12 and the amendments which have
been made to Section 12 from time to time. It
is on account of those documents having been
placed on record that this Court was in a better
- 173 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
position to examine the scope and ambit of
Section 12.
33.8. Subsection (1) of Section 12, as it stood
originally, has been reproduced hereinabove,
which indicates that no amendment of any by-
law of a Cooperative Society shall be valid
unless such amendment has been registered
under this Act. Thus, insofar as subsection (1)
of Section 12, as it originally stood, the only
restriction was that an amendment would not
be valid unless it is registered and there are no
timelines which have been prescribed. It is by
way of the amendment, to subsection (1) of
Section 12 in the year 2013 that the present
subsection (1) has been introduced.
33.9. A perusal of the Section 8 of the Amendment
Act of the year 1998 would indicate that in
terms of subsection (1) of Section 8 of the
Amendment Act, the addition has been made at
the end of subsection (2) of Section 12
- 174 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
prescribing a period of three months from the
date of receipt of the proposal and it is in the
very same Amendment Act that by subsection
(2) of Section 8, the deeming fiction has been
introduced by insertion of subsection (2A) to
Section 12. It is therefore clear that there is a
draftsman error which has occurred in the
amendment. Subsection (1) which is referred to
in the newly inserted, Subsection (2A) cannot
refer to Subsection (1) of Section 12 since as
on the date on which Subsection (2A) was
introduced, Subsection (1) of Section 12 only
indicated that no amendment of any by-law of
Cooperative Society shall be valid unless such
amendment has been registered under the Act.
33.10. Thus, if the then existing Subsection (1) of
Section 12 and Subsection (2A) of Section 12
were to be read together, the same would not
make any sense. It is only on account of the
subsequent amendment to Subsection (1) of
- 175 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Section 12 in the year 2013 that the scope for
application of Subsection (2A) to the amended
sub-section (1) of Section 12 in the year 2013.
33.11. Be that as it may, what has been introduced by
way of amendment in subsection (1) of Section
12 in the year 2013 is as regards an
amendment made to the by-laws to bring the
same in conformity with the by-laws. The
proviso to subsection (1) of Section 12
prescribes the period within which the
Cooperative Society has to make such
amendment, that is 90 days. Thus, the period
prescribed under the proviso to subsection (1)
of Section 12 already take cares of the
requirement of timelines for such an
amendment.
33.12. Coming back to the timelines prescribed under
subsection (2) of Section 12 requiring the
Registrar to, within a period of three months
from the date of receipt of the proposal,
- 176 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
register the amendment, which is subject to
subclause (i) to (v) of subsection (2) of Section
12. It is by virtue of this amendment of the
year 1998, that for the first time, a time period
was prescribed for a voluntary amendment
under subsection (2) of Section 12.
33.13. Subsection (2) of section 12 requires for the
Registrar to be satisfied that the proposed
amendment is not contrary to the Act and the
Rules, does not conflict with the cooperative
principles, satisfies the requirements of sound
business, promotes economic interest to the
members of Society, and is not inconsistent
with the principles of social justice. The
Registrar is imposed with an obligation to,
within a period of three months from the date
of receipt of the proposal, register the
amendment.
33.14. Of course, if the above are not satisfied, the
Registrar can always refuse the amendment on
- 177 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
account of the non-satisfaction of any or all of
the above grounds or a combination thereof.
Thus, this gives rise to three situations. One,
where the amendment has been approved by
the Registrar, in which case the deeming fiction
would not be required to be applied; two, where
the amendment has been rejected by the
Registrar by an order, again the deeming fiction
would not be applicable. Third, if no order is
passed by the Registrar, that is, no order of
approving or rejecting the amendment, the
deeming fiction under subsection (2A) of
Section 12 would apply. It is in that case that
the deeming fiction provides for the
amendment proposed by the Society to be
deemed to be registered if no order has been
passed within 90 days of the same being
forwarded.
33.15. This interpretation and or declaration having
been required to be made on account of the
- 178 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
draftsman error in the amendment carried out
in the year 1998, I am of the considered
opinion that the deeming fiction cannot be
applied retrospectively that is to events prior to
the declaration made in this judgment. The
reading of the provision as it stood thus,
without appreciating the amendments which
have been placed on record before this Court
and without correcting the draftsman's error
would only indicate that the deeming fiction
would apply to subsection (1) of Section 12 and
not to an amendment forwarded under
subsection (1A) of Section 12 being considered
by the Registrar under subsection (2) of section
12.
33.16. The Principal Secretary, Cooperatives
Department and the Registrar of Cooperative
Societies are directed to forward a copy of this
order to all the Registrars dealing with
amendments so as to put them on notice that if
- 179 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
no order is passed on an amendment submitted
by the Society within 90 days from the date of
receipt in terms of subsection (2A), the
amendment is deemed to have been registered.
The Government Press is also directed to issue
necessary corrigendum in respect of the above
so also the publishers would be required to
publish a corrected version of Section 12
inasmuch as the reference to subsection (1)
and subsection (2A) of Section 12 should have
to be read as Subsection (1A) of Section 12.
33.17. Hence, I answer Point No.4 by declaring that
there is a deeming fiction available under
Subsection (2A) of Section 12 of the KCS Act in
respect of amendments proposed by a Society
under Subsection (1A) and if such a proposal
submitted under Subsection 2 is neither
accepted nor rejected by the Registrar within 3
months from the date of receipt of the said
proposal it shall be deemed to have been so
- 180 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
registered. It is however clarified that this
declaration shall come into effect from the date
of pronouncement of this order and would not
apply retrospectively.
34. Answer to Points 5(a) and 5(b):
5(a) Was the Registrar's rejection of the
amendment resolution proper and
within his powers under Section
12(2)? Did the Registrar validly
conclude that the amendments were
inconsistent with the Act, Rules, or co-
operative principles?
AND
5(b) Does the removal of the Apex Bank
nominee and others to accommodate
new Taluka representation violate
statutory or cooperative principles, and
do such decisions lie within the
exclusive domain of the Society or are
subject to State oversight?
34.1. Both the above points being related to each
other are taken up for consideration together
and answered accordingly.
- 181 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
34.2. The submission of Sri Jaykumar S. Patil, learned
senior counsel is that the Federal Society had
eliminated the nominees of the Apex Bank and
the Housebuilding Co-operative Society in order
to make room for representation of two new
talukas that had been created in
Chikkaballapura District. The maximum number
of Directors being 21, it is within this maximum
limit of 21 that the concerned action could be
taken.
34.3. There being a requirement for the
representative of two new talukas to be
represented, the only way that it could be done
was for eliminating the nominee of the Apex
Bank and the House Building Corporative
Society. This is an action which has been
decided upon democratically by the Society and
as such, it is contended that the same could not
have been rejected by the Registrar.
Sri.Jayakumar S.Patil, learned senior counsel
- 182 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
would also contend that the action taken by the
Board, as it then existed, was proper and
correct.
34.4. Smt.Prathima Honnapura, the Additional
Advocate General would submit that a
representative of the Apex Bank could not have
been deleted from the Board of Directors
inasmuch as the Federal Society being a District
Cooperative Bank, the funds which are released
for the District Cooperative Bank by NABARD is
channeled through the Apex Bank and it is the
Apex Bank which monitors the use, misuse and
abuse of the funds. As such there being a
financial discipline which is required to be
maintained by a DCC bank, it is required for a
nominee of the Apex Bank to be present on the
Board so as to be aware of the decisions of the
Board and advise the Board in relation thereto.
She submits that there are several complaints
- 183 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
pending against the former President and some
of the members of the Board as regards
embezzlement of funds, siphoning of monies,
etc., and it is for this reason that the nominee
of the Apex Bank is required to be present on
the Board.
34.5. Insofar as deletion of a nominee of the House
Building Cooperative Society, she submits that
there is no particular dispute in relation thereto.
Thus, on the above basis, she submits that the
action taken by the Registrar in rejecting the
Amendment Resolution of the Federal Society
for deletion of the nominee of the Apex Bank is
proper and correct.
34.6. The Registrar has given sufficient reasons in its
order dated 20-2-2024 and as such, she
submits that the order of the Registrar being
proper and correct does not require any
interference at the hands of this Court.
- 184 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
34.7. A perusal of the order of the JRCS dated 20-2-
2024 would indicate that the JRCS has
considered the Karnataka State Coperative
Apex Bank Limited, to function as a major
financial support (loan) providing institution to
the bank and as a key and first tier institution
in the three-tier agricultural finance system.
The Apex Bank had expressed its objection to
the proposed amendment to the by-law
regarding deleting the nominee Director
position of the Apex Bank. The Managing
Director of the Karnataka State Cooperative
Apex Bank has raised an issue categorically
stating that as per Section 28-A(1) as also
Section 28-A (2) 2nd proviso (b), there is a
provision for nominating one person from the
financing or credit agency in this case Apex
bank. Hence, the Apex Bank had an objection
to the amendment sought for by the Federal
Society. The JRCS considering the said
- 185 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
objection and considering that the Apex Bank is
a financial institution and their objection needs
consideration, has rejected the deletion of the
Apex Bank. It is this aspect which would have
to be considered by this Court to determine as
to whether this rejection insofar as deletion of
Apex Bank nominee, is proper and correct or
not.
34.8. It is not in dispute that the Federal Union is a
Cooperative Bank and as indicated supra, the
funds of NABARD are received through the Apex
Bank by the Federal Union DCC bank. Section
28-A (2) 2nd proviso (b), indicates that subject
to the minimum and maximum number of
members of the Board specified in subsection
(2) of Section 28A, the bylaws of the
Cooperative Society shall provide for
composition of the Board of that Society to
include within the permissible limits - in case of
assisted Society, a government nominee, in
- 186 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
case of all cooperative Societies, other than
non-agricultural credit cooperative Societies, if
necessary, an ex officio member and nominee,
from financing or the credit agency.
34.9. Now it is this interpretation of "if necessary"
that is sought to be made by the counsel for
the petitioner to contend that there is no
mandate for a representative of the credit
agency to be on Board. The proposed
amendment having been received by the
Registrar he had sent the same to the Apex
Bank for comments since there was a proposal
to delete the nominee of the Apex Bank. The
Apex bank has expressed its objections to such
deletion and asserted that it is the credit
agency that transferred the funds received from
NABARD.
34.10. The Registrar, in his wisdom has deemed it fit
that it is necessary for a nominee from the
financing or the credit agency to be on the
- 187 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Board, taking into consideration the financial
irregularities in respect of the Respondent No.4
Union. There being certain complaints and
proceedings are not in dispute. The present
union operates in two districts of the State and
deals with large amounts of money which is
made available by NABARD through the Apex
Bank. For the purpose of providing an elected
representative from a new taluka, I am of the
considered opinion that the Federal Union could
not have deleted a representative of the Apex
Bank. There could have been other adjustments
which could have been made, which have been
so made by the Registrar in his subsequent
order. The amendment which had been
proposed by the Society for change in the
composition of the Directors is a self-serving
amendment made with an intention to
overcome the oversight which could be
exercised by a nominee of the Apex Bank.
- 188 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that
the Registrar was within his powers under
subsection (2) of Section 12 to reject the
amendment.
34.11. Section 12(2) has been dealt with hereinabove.
The Registrar can reject an amendment if the
same is contrary to the Provisions Act, conflicts
with the Co-operative principles is not in
furtherance of sound business, detrimental to
the economic interest of the members of the
Society and or being inconsistent with the
principles. The amendment while being
rejected, the JRCS, has noted the objection on
part of the Apex Bank. This objection could be
considered both under Section 28A and as also
Subsection (2) of Section 12. Since the same
would indicate that the removal of the nominee
of the Apex Bank would conflict with the
cooperative principles. It would not be in the
interest of business or the Society since there
- 189 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
would be no oversight by the Apex Bank. If the
embezzlement, etc. were to continue
unchecked, without oversight, the economic
interests of the members in the Society would
be adversely affected. Such misuse of the funds
of the Society would also be contrary to the
principles of social justice.
34.12. Hence, I answer Points No.5(a) and 5(b) by
holding that the JRCS order dated 20-2-2024,
rejecting the amendment which had been
forwarded by Society is well within the powers
under subsection (2) of Section 12. The
objection of the Apex Bank having been
considered, the amendment proposed is
inconsistent with the cooperative principles, and
the requirements under subsection (2) of
Section 12.
34.13. The removal of the Apex Bank nominee to
accommodate new Taluka representatives
violate the principles of oversight. The State
- 190 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
being vested with the obligation to see to it that
the finances of the Society are protected. The
Apex Bank also being vested with the obligation
to see to it that the funds disbursed by the
Apex Bank are used properly. There being an
objection on part of the Apex Bank, the JRCS
has rightly rejected the amendment in deleting
the representative of the Apex Bank from the
Board of Directors.
35. Answers to Points No.6(a, b and c):
6(a)In light of the 97th Constitutional
Amendment and Article 43B, whether
the Registrar's direction to reverse the
Society's democratically passed
resolution (to include representation for
newly formed Talukas by removing
certain categories) constitutes
impermissible interference in the
autonomous and democratic functioning
of co-operative societies?
6(b) Whether the Registrar's actions infringe
on the right to form and operate co-
operative societies freely, including
their internal governance decisions,
especially after the 97th Amendment?
- 191 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
And
6(c)Would the State have the power to
regulate a Co-operative Society
pursuant to the 97th Amendment to the
Constitution, introducing Article
19(1)(c) and Article 43B in the
Constitution of India?
35.1. All the above points are related to each other
and considered together.
35.2. The submission of Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, learned
Senior counsel is that by virtue of the 97th
amendment to the Constitution and insertion of
Article 43B, the State and its officers like the
Registrar have to give prime importance to any
decision taken by the Society democratically.
The Society in a meeting, being of the opinion
that, the representative of the Apex Bank and a
representative of the Housebuilding Cooperative
Society would have to be deleted to make room
for the elected representative of the two new
- 192 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
talukas. The same being in exercise of
democratic rights of the members, the order of
the Registrar is violative of the said amendment
and Article 43B. His further submission is that
the Union can carry out its business in the
manner it deems fit. There being a fundamental
right to carry on trade on business under Article
19(1)(c) of the Constitution.
35.3. There cannot be any dispute as regards the
above. The democratic right of the elected
representative of the Cooperative Society
cannot be taken away, nor can the right to
conduct trade or business be taken away
Arbitrarily or without reason. However, these
rights are subject to some exceptions.
35.4. Article 19 of the Constitution is reproduced
hereunder for easy reference:
19. Protection of certain rights regarding
freedom of speech, etc.(1)All citizens shall
have the right-
- 193 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
(a) to freedom of speech and expression
(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms;
(c) to form associations or unions or co-operative
societies;
(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India;
(e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory
of India;and
(g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any
occupation, trade or business.
(2) Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall
affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent
the State from making any law, in so far as such
law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise
of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the
interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India,
the security of the State, friendly relations with
Foreign States, public order, decency or morality or
in relation to contempt of court, defamation or
incitement to an offence.
(3) Nothing in sub-clause (b) of the said clause
shall affect the operation of any existing law in so
far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making
any law imposing, in the interests of the
sovereignty and integrity of India or public order,
reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right
conferred by the said sub-clause.
(4) Nothing in sub-clause (c) of the said clause
shall affect the operation of any existing law in so
far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making
any law imposing, in the interests of the
sovereignty and integrity of India or public order or
morality, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of
the right conferred by the said sub-clause.
- 194 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
(5) Nothing in sub-clauses (d) and (e) of the said
clause shall affect the operation of any existing law
in so far as it imposes, or prevents the State from
making any law imposing, reasonable restrictions
on the exercise of any of the rights conferred by
the said sub-clauses either in the interests of the
general public or for the protection of the interests
of any Scheduled Tribe.
(6) Nothing in sub-clause (g) of the said clause
shall affect the operation of any existing law in so
far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making
any law imposing, in the interests of the general
public, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of
the right conferred by the said sub-clause, and, in
particular, nothing in the said sub-clause shall
affect the operation of any existing law in so far as
it relates to, or prevent the State from making any
law relating to,-
(i) the professional or technical qualifications
necessary for practising any profession or carrying
on any occupation, trade or business, or
(ii) the carrying on by the State, or by a
corporation owned or controlled by the State, of
any trade, business, industry or service, whether to
the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or
otherwise.
35.5. Article 19(1)(c) provides a right to form
associations or unions. Article 19(1)(g) provides
a right to practice any profession or carrying on
any occupation, trade or business. The rights
under Article 19(1) shall not affect the
- 195 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
operation of any existing law or prevent the
State from making any law, insofar as such law
imposes reasonable restriction on the exercise
of the right conferred under Article 19(1) as
indicated by Article 19(2).
35.6. Thus, the right under Article 19(1)(c) is not an
absolute right but is governed by the provisions
of the KCS Act, 1959, the KCS Rules 1960 and
any subordinate or delegated legislation made
thereunder. Suffice it to say that the formation
of association or unions or Co-operative
Societies is not a right without any restriction,
but the restrictions are already contained in the
KCS Act, KCS Rules, etc.
35.7. The decision in Venkategowda's case
rendered by this Court recognizes the aforesaid
rights to form a Society, and laid down grounds
of unconstitutionality. In the present case, the
Constitutionality or otherwise of any provision is
not in question and hence, the said decision in
- 196 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
my considered opinion would not be applicable
to the present fact situation. There cannot be
any dispute with the decision insofar as the
functioning of the Society is concerned.
35.8. The rejection of the resolution for amendment
by the Registrar cannot be said to be an
interference with the working of the Society so
long as the same is in accordance with law. As
held supra, the deletion of a representative of
the Apex Bank is not in the interest of the
Society and taking into consideration the
objection of the Apex Bank, the Registrar has
passed a proper order.
35.9. The decision in Vipulbhai M.Chaudhary's case
again recognized the meaning of a
cooperatives, the objects and values etc. and
there cannot be any dispute in relation thereto.
While the Board of a Cooperative Society were
to exercise their independent decision making
power and take necessary action in relation
- 197 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
thereto, the actions of the Cooperative Society
cannot be contra the interest of the Society and
or its members.
35.10. As indicated supra, admittedly the Federal
Society receiving funds from NABARD through
the Apex Bank, there is a requirement for
administrative and financial oversight by a
nominee of the Apex Bank. The Apex Bank,
wanting to be on the Board and having raised
an objection as regards the amendment, it does
not lie for the Society to contend that it does
not wish to have a member of the Apex Bank.
The consequence of not having a member from
the Apex Bank on the Board would necessarily
be for no funds being made available by the
Apex Bank to the Federal Society which would
not be in the interest of the Society or its
members. The right of the Society is
accompanied and coupled with the
corresponding duty in conducting of its business
- 198 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
in a proper manner. The disbursal of funds by
the Apex Bank to the Society would also include
a duty on part of the Apex Bank to see to it that
the said amounts disbursed, which are public
funds, are made use of in a required and proper
manner. Thus, the Petitioners cannot, in my
considered opinion, only claim their rights
without discharging their duties.
35.11. The right conferred by the 97th Constitutional
Amendment by the introduction of Article 43B
as also 19(1)(c) is subject to the reasonable
restrictions available under the existing law and
or by legislating new laws. The existing law
requiring the Registrar to consider the induction
of a representative of the Apex Bank if
necessary. Such restriction cannot be wished
away by the Federal Society as sought to be
done in the present matter. The decision in
Uppinangadi's case is also similar to that in
Vipulbhai's case. The mere recognition of a
- 199 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
right under Article 19(1)(c) and 43B would not
give a right to the Society to ride roughshod,
but the Society would have to comply with the
applicable law. As held by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in Damansingh's case, the exercise of
powers by the Registrar under the KCS Act and
Rules cannot be said to be violative of Article
19(1)(c) or Article 43B.
35.12. The petitioners who are members of the Federal
Society have no independent right as regards
the functioning of the Federal Society. It is for
the Federal Society to decide the manner in
which it functions. A Society on becoming a
member of the Federal Society loses its
individuality and has no independent right
except as provided by the bylaws. A member of
the Society cannot claim contra to the bylaws.
As held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Cheokki
Employees' Cooperative Society's case, the
right to form a Society under Article 19(1)(c)
- 200 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
does not confer a right on any person to
become a member of any Cooperative Society
or form any Cooperative Society.
35.13. The formation, membership, operation and
administration of a Cooperative Society would
be governed as per the applicable law and in
the State of Karnataka by the Karnataka
Cooperative Society Act 1959, Rules 1960 and
any other notifications, circulars, etc. issued
thereunder. By virtue of the 97th Amendment
introducing Article 19(1)(c) and 43B, the
Society or its members cannot now seek to
contend that they are above the law, they are
above the Registrar, and or that they would not
comply with the applicable law.
35.14. Irrespective of the introduction of 19(1)(c) and
43B, I am of the considered opinion that the
Society will have to be bound by the applicable
law. As held by a Coordinate bench of this
Court in Taraganahalli Milk Producers Co-
- 201 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
operative Society, the inclusion of a
Government nominee cannot be said to be
violative of Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution.
Similarly, the inclusion of a nominee of the
Apex Bank cannot be said to be violative of
Article 19(1)(c) or Article 43B. Thus, it is in the
above background I answer Points 6(a), 6(b)
and 6(c) as under:
35.15. No Cooperative Society can on the basis of the
97th Constitutional Amendment, relying on the
newly introduced Article 43B and or Article
19(1)(c) contend that the Registrar would not
have any power under the KCS Act, 1959 or
KCS Rules, 1960. The Society would have to act
in compliance with the applicable Primary
legislation, secondary legislation and delegated
legislation in force which would include the KCS
Act and KCS Rules.
35.16. The democratic functioning and or autonomy
conferred by Article 43B does not extend to the
- 202 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
Society, deciding any matter in any manner it
wishes. Any decision of the Society would have
to be in accordance with the applicable law.
35.17. Any direction issued by the Registrar under the
KCS Act and or Rules cannot be said to impinge
upon the internal governance of the
Cooperative Society, since the Cooperative
Society is bound by the said Statutes.
35.18. Article 19(1)(c) does not confer any power or
authority on the Society to delete any
representative on its own whims and fancies.
Any addition or deletion of a representative
would have to be in accordance with law and
such deletion or addition being in furtherance of
an amendment to the bylaws would have to
comply with the requirement of subsection (2)
of Section 12 of the KCS Act.
36. Answer to Points No.7(a, b and c):
- 203 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
7(a)Was proper notice, agenda, and
communication of the proposed
amendments given to all members, and
was the resolution passed by the
required quorum and procedure?
7(b) Does non-compliance with procedural
requirements invalidate the
amendment, regardless of majority
support at the meeting?
And
7(c) Whether the Resolution dated
6.11.2023 approving the amendment is
violative of Rule 6 of the KCS Rules on
account of notice relating to the
proposed amendment not having been
issued to all the members and the
proposed amendment not being
contained in the agenda of the meeting?
36.1. All the above points being related to each other
are taken for consideration together.
36.2. One other reason why the JRCS has rejected
the amendment is that there was no compliance
with Rule 6 of the KCS Rules 1960. The said
- 204 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
procedure not having been followed, the
resolution cannot be accepted.
36.3. Rule 6 of the KCS Rules 1960 is reproduced
hereunder for easy reference:
6: Procedure regarding amendment of bye-
Laws(1) Where a Co-operative Society proposes to
amend its bye-laws, no such amendments shall be
made save by a resolution passed by a two-thirds
majority of the members present and voting, at a
general meeting of the society;
(2) No such resolution shall be valid, unless notice of
clear fifteen days of the text of the existing bye-law,
the text of the proposed amendment and reasons
therefore" has been given to the members of the
society in accordance with the bye-laws;
(3) In every case in which a society proposes to
amend its bye-laws, an application shall be made to
the Registrar together with,-
(a) a copy of the resolution referred to in sub-rule (1),
(b) such number of copies of the proposed
amendment as may be specified by the Registrar in
this behalf;
(bb) a treasury challan or Demand Draft in favour of
the Registrar for having remitted the fee specified
below:-
Jurisdiction of Societies Amount of fees
If the area of operation of a Society is.-
(1) less than a taluk Rs.1000/-
(2) taluk and above but less than a district Rs.2500/-
- 205 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
(3) district and above but less than region Rs.5,OOO/-
(4) Region and above Rs.12,5OO
(c) a certificate signed by the presiding Authority of
the meeting, that the procedure specified in sub-rule
(1) and sub-rule (2) and in the bye-laws has been
followed; and
(d) any other particulars that may be required by the
Registrar in this behalf.
(4) Every such application shall be made within sixty
days from the date of the general meeting at which
such amendment was passed:
Provided that the Registrar may condone the delay, if
any, for sufficient cause.
(5) When the Registrar registers an amendment of
the bye-laws of a Co-operative Society he shall send a
copy thereof to the financing bank, if any, to which
the Co-operative Society is affiliated.
(6) Where the Registrar proposes any amendment to
the bye-laws of a Co-operative Society under Sub-
Section (5) of section 12, the authority competent to
convene the general meeting shall place such
proposal before the annual or special general
meeting, as the case may be, and a decision on such
proposal shall be taken at such meeting and the Co-
operative Society shall carry out amendment of bye-
laws as directed by the Registrar as per section
12(5)of the Act
36.4. Rule 6 is a specific provision relating to the
procedure, to be followed regarding
amendment of the bylaws. Sub-rule (1) of Rule
- 206 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
6 provides that where a cooperative Society
proposes to amend its bylaws, no amendment
shall be made save by a resolution passed by
two-thirds majority of the members present
and voting at a general meeting of the Society.
Thus, the resolution for amendment would have
to be considered by a general meeting of the
Society and two-thirds of the members present
and voting have to approve the amendment.
36.5. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 provides that no such
resolution shall be valid unless notice of clear
15 days with the text of the existing bylaw, the
text of the proposed amendment and the
reasons therefore have been given to the
members of the Society in accordance with the
bylaws. It is therefore required that a notice of
15 clear days is required to be given to all the
members. The notice should contain the text of
the existing bylaws, the text of the proposed
- 207 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
amendment, and this notice has to be issued to
each of the members.
36.6. In the present case, it is not in dispute that no
such notice had been issued, inasmuch as
though a notice for holding the general meeting
was issued, the said notice did not contain any
reference to the amendment to the bylaws as
an agenda item, nor was the existing by-law
and the proposed amendment reflected in the
notice.
36.7. Thus, there is a clear and categorical violation
of sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 of KCS Rules 1960. An
amendment to the by-laws being an important
issue relating to the functioning of the Society,
the manner in which the amendment has to be
carried out has been categorically indicated in
Rule 6, which has to be read in conjunction with
Section 12 of the KCS Act. If the said
requirement is not followed, then the resolution
approving the amendment would have to be
- 208 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
held to be non-est and not binding on all the
members.
36.8. In the present case, a general meeting having
been called for without there being any agenda
item relating to the amendment, the said
amendment has been considered by the
persons who are present and approved by
those persons without the other persons having
any knowledge of the same. The JRCS has
considered the same in its impugned order and
has come to a categorical conclusion that the
mandatory requirements under sub-rule (1) of
Rule 6 and sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 have not been
followed. There is nothing which has been
placed on record by the petitioners to indicate
such compliance. Though it is contended that
those documents are available with the
Administrator, the fact remains that a notice
had to be issued to the petitioners giving such
details of compliance with sub-rule (1) of Rule 6
- 209 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
and sub-rule (2) of Rule 6. Such a notice in
compliance with Rule 6 has not been placed on
record by any of the petitioners, leading to the
only conclusion that the requirement of Rule 6
has not been complied with.
36.9. Hence, I answer Points No.7(a, b and c) by
holding that for the purpose of carrying out any
amendment, the procedure under Rule 6 of the
KCS Rules, 1960 is required to be mandatory
complied with.
36.10. A notice detailing out the agenda, the existing
byelaw, the proposed amendment to be made
and the reasons thereof are required to be
included in the notice.
36.11. If no such notice is issued to all the members,
any resolution passed by a Society approving
the amendment is non-est.
36.12. In the present case, no notice having been
issued in compliance with sub-rule (2) of Rule 6
and sub-rule (1) of Rule 6, the meeting could
- 210 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
not have considered an amendment to the
bylaws. When it could not so consider the
amendment, resolution passed approving the
amendment as a subject taken up with the
permission of the Chair is not permissible and
on this ground also, the resolution dated 6-11-
2023 forwarded by the Society to the Registrar
was required to be rejected by the Registrar
and the Registrar has rightly rejected the same.
37. Answer to Point No.8: Are the impugned actions
(rejection of amendment, directions to modify
bye-laws) legally valid and require quashing
through a writ of certiorari?
37.1. The aspect of deemed acceptance of the
amendment and rejection of the amendment
has been dealt with supra.
37.2. What remains to be considered is the last
direction which has been issued by the
Registrar seeking for modification of the bylaws
issued on 3.8.2024. By way of the said direction
- 211 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
at Annexure-F, the JRCS has issued a direction
under subsection (5) of Section 12 directing the
removal of a position allocated to Housing
Cooperative Society and one Director position
allocated to the Milk Producers Women's
Cooperative Society, the newly formed talukas,
namely Manchenahalli and Chelur, would have
to be accommodated. Having considered the
said directions, the nominee of the Apex Bank
not being capable of being deleted for the
reasons aforesaid and the elected
representatives of Manchenahalli and Chelur
being required to be accommodated, I am of
the considered opinion that the direction which
has been issued by the Registrar for deleting
the allocation to housing Co-operative Society
and Milk Producer Women's Co-operative
Societies cannot be found fault with, more so,
when in the resolution passed by the Society
itself, the position allocated to Housing Co-
- 212 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
operative Societies had been deleted by the
Society itself.
37.3. By way of such direction, instead of removal of
a nominee of the Apex Bank, the Registrar has
directed to delete the position reserved for
constituency of Milk Producers Women's Co-
operative Societies. The Federal Society being a
Credit Cooperative Society and a Credit
Cooperative Bank, I am of the considered
opinion that deletion of a representative of Milk
Producers Women's Cooperative Society, would
not in any manner detrimentally affect the
functioning of the Federal Society and as such,
I do not find any infirmity with the same.
37.4. The Directions issued under Subsection (5) of
Section12 being as above, and all the
objections raised in regard thereto having been
considered and answered, I'am of the
considered opinion that there would be no
- 213 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
requirement to hold a further meeting in terms
of sub-rule (6) of Rule 6.
37.5. I answer Point No.8 by holding that the
impugned actions, that is, rejection of the
amendment, direction to modify the bylaws, are
legally valid and are not required to be
interfered with.
38. General Directions:
38.1. As indicated supra, there was difficulty in
ascertaining the applicable law on account of,
firstly, a draftsman error in the amendment
and, secondly, the error in the published
documents.
38.2. This is not a stray occurrence. The non
availability of the relevant primary legislation,
secondary legislation, delegated legislation,
executive legislation creates delay in the
disposal of the matters and sometimes results
in unnecessary adjournments.
- 214 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
38.3. Technology being as is today, it would be
required for the State Government to
implement a system where all the primary
legislation, secondary legislation, delegated
legislation, executive legislation, the rules,
regulations, notifications, office orders are
available for general public consumption as
regards which a repository would have to be
created.
38.4. Learned Additional Advocate General would
submit that such a repository is being created
in pursuance of the orders passed by another
Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.4511/2024. I am
of the considered opinion that while such a
repository is being created, a similar system as
Google Maps Time Lapse could also be included
in such a manner that the law as on the date
input into the system is made available in its
entirety and not just the Amendment Act or the
annotation to the Amendment Act.
- 215 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
38.5. This being necessary for the reason that Courts
and lawyers deal with matters much after the
occurrence of the event and as and when the
matter is dealt with in the Court of law, the law
as on the date on which the event occurred
would be relevant to make the law as on that
date applicable. To find out what is the law
applicable as on that date would require access
to books. All the books cannot be stored in the
library of the High Court, let alone in the Court
Hall. Thus, it is the technology which would
have to be used to achieve the above purpose
as indicated above.
38.6. One other aspect which has come into light in
the present matter is as regards the date of
receipt of a document and the time of the
receipt thereof is not found mentioned
inasmuch as the inward register and the inward
stamp only reflects the date and not the time.
It is therefore required for the Chief Secretary
- 216 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
to issue necessary directions to all the officers
to note the time and date on which any
document is received by the concerned office.
38.7. It is also noted that while referring to a
document received, reference is made to the
date on document and not the date of receipt.
That is again leading to lot of confusion. The
Chief Secretary along with the Principal
Secretary E-Governance are requested to look
into the matter and to come up with a software
which could address the issue as also to issue
necessary directions to all the officers to while
referring to a particular document received by
such officer, categorically to state the date and
time on which it has been received apart from
the date of the document.
38.8. The Principal Secretary, Cooperatives
Department and the Registrar of Cooperative
Societies are directed to forward a copy of this
order to all the Registrars dealing with
- 217 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
amendments so as to put them on notice that if
no order is passed on an amendment submitted
by the Society within 90 days from the date of
receipt in terms of subsection (2A), the
amendment is deemed to have been registered.
The Government Press is also directed to issue
necessary corrigendum in respect of the above
so also the publishers would be required to
publish a corrected version of Section 12
inasmuch as the reference to subsection (1)
and subsection (2A) of Section 12 should have
to be read as Subsection (1A) of Section 12.
39. Answer to Point No.9: What order?
39.1. No grounds being made out. The Writ Petitions
stand dismissed.
39.2. The Registrar is directed to give effect to the
modifications proposed under Sub-section (5)
of Section 12, by registering the said
modification/amendment to the bylaws, and to
- 218 -
NC: 2025:KHC:18152
continue with the holding of the elections at the
earliest in terms thereof.
39.3. Though the above matter is disposed, relist on
4.6.2025 for reporting compliance with the
above General Directions.
Sd/-
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
Prs
