Karnataka High Court
Panja Primary Agricultural Credit ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 August, 2024
R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 26102 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 27810 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27813 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27814 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27847 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27849 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27851 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27853 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27888 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27898 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27904 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27926 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27979 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27988 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27994 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 27995 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28013 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28014 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28016 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28028 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28089 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28119 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28229 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28231 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28235 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28242 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28246 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28252 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28273 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28278 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28281 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28284 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28285 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28297 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28341 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28353 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28384 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
2
WRIT PETITION NO. 28397 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 28646 OF 2023 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 7450 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 7451 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 7452 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 7490 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 7552 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 7566 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 8460 OF 2024 (CS-RES)
IN WP NO.26102/2023:
BETWEEN:
1 . UPPINANGADY CO-OPERATIVE
AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO. DRG/S/2635/76-77,
NEAR UPPINANGADY BUS STAND,
UPPINANGADY-574 241,
PUTTUR TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
K.V. PRASAD, S/O. LATE RAMA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT KAYARPADY, ILANTHILA VILLAGE,
BELTHANGADY TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT-574 241.
REG UNDER CO OPP SOCIETIES ACT, 1959.
2. JAGADEESH RAO. M,
S/O. RAMAKRISHNAYYA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
R/AT MANIKKALA HOUSE,
BAJATHOOR, PUTTUR TALUK-574 241.
3. YASHAVANTHA. G,
S/O. ANNAYYA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
R/AT YASHAVANTHA MAHAL,
BAJATHOOR, PUTTUR TALUK-574 241.
4. K. GOPALAKRISHNA BHAT,
S/O. KESHAVA BHAT. K,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
R/AT KESHAVA NILAYA, ILANTHILA,
BELTHANGADY TALUK-574 241.
3
NOTE:SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFITS NOT CLAIMED
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI KESHAVA BHAT A, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA,
SRI M.R.RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI H N BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR INTERVENERS,
SRI B V SHANKARANARAYANA RAO, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI A C BALARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR INTERVENERS AND
SRI T L KIRAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR INTERVENERS)
IN WP NO.27810/2023:
BETWEEN:
PANJA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
NO.1028, UTHKARASHA SAHAKARA SOUDHA,
SULLIA TALUK,
POST: PANJA 574232, D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESENT PRESIDENT GANESH PAI,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
SULLIA TALUK, POST: PANJA - 574232,
D.K. DISTRICT
4
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO. 27813/2023:
BETWEEN:
IDKIDU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
A CO-OP. SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER
KARNATAKA CO OP SOCIETIES ACT 1959,
REG NO.3628, URIMAJALU,
IDKIDU VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTWAL TALUK - 574220, D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
B SUDHAKR SHETTY, S/O B VASU SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
5
R/AT IDKIDU BANTWAL TALUK,
DK DISTRICT - 574220.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARING THAT
THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT
NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE
AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27814/2023:
BETWEEN:
HATHYADKA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
6
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO-OP. SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER
KARNATAKA CO-OP, SOCIETIES ACT, 1959
NO AR-37/RSR/REG.582/1989-99,
HATHYADKA, POST: ARASINAMKKI,
BELTHANGADY TALUK,
D K DISTRICT, 574198,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
RAGHAVENDRA NAYAK,
S/O LATE PURUSHOTHAMA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT HATHYADKA, ARASINAMAKKI POST,
BELTHANGADY TALUK, D K DISTRICT -574198.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
7
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27847/2023:
BETWEEN:
BELLARE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO-OP. SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER
KARNATAKA CO-OP SOCIETIES ACT 1959,
NO.DRG/S/2618, BELLARE, POST BELLARE,
SULLIA TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574212.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
SHRIRAMA C, S/O CHIDANANDA RAO P S,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/A BELLARE SULLIA TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574212.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
8
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27849/2023:
BETWEEN:
KANAKAMAJALU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO OP SOCIETY REGSITERED UNDER
KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETIES ACT, 1959
REGD NO.DRG/S/2616/76-77
JALSUR, KANAKAMAJALU POST,574223
SUILLIA TALUK, D K DISTRICT,
REP BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
NARAYANA BOMMETTI,
S/O LATE DUGGAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/A KANAKAMAJALU, SULLIA TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574223.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
9
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27851/2023:
BETWEEN:
KALMADKA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.DRP/RGL/25926/04-05,
SULLIA TALUK, POST: KALMADKA - 574212,
D.K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
UDAYA KUMAR BETTA,
S/O LATE ISHWARA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
SULLIA TALUK, POST: KALMADKA - 574212,
D.K DISTRICT,
REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETY ACT, 1959.
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
10
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27853/2023:
BETWEEN:
SULLIA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.1200, SAHAKARA SADANA,
NEAR BUS STAND,
KASABA VILLAGE, SULLIA TALUK
POST:SULLIA 574 239,
DK DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
BALAGOPALA M,
S/O THIMMAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
KASABA VILLAGE, SULLIA TLAUK
POST: SULLIA - 574 239,
D K DISTRICT,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
11
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27888/2023:
BETWEEN:
MANDEKOLU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.438, SULLIA TALUK,
POST: MADEKOLU - 574 256,D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
RAMAKRISHNA RAI P G,
12
S/O KINHANNA RAI,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
SULLIA TALUK, POST:MADEKOLU - 574 256,
D K DISTRICT,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27898/2023:
BETWEEN:
13
NELLUR KEMRAJE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.13764/97-98, REGISTERED
UNDER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT,
SAHAKARA SOUDHA ELEMANE, SULLIA TALUK,
POST: NELLUR KEMRAJE - 574248, D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
B VISHNU BHAT,
S/O SHANAKARANARAYANA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
SULLIA TALUK,POST: NELLUR KEMRAJE -574248
D K DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
14
IN WP NO.27904/2023:
BETWEEN:
YEDAMANGALA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO D,R,P,R, G,N, 13765/98-99,
YEDAMANGALA, KADABA TALUK,
POST: YEDAMANGALA - 574221 D.K. DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
RAMAKRISHNA RAI S/O MANJUNATHA RAI,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
YEDAMANGALA , KADABA TALUK,
POST: YEDAMANGALA - 574221, D K DISTRICT,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
15
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27926/2023:
BETWEEN:
YENEKAL PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.F.F.48, KADABA TALUK
POST: YENEKAL-574238,D.K. DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
BHAVANISHANKAR P V,
S/O LATE VENKAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
KADABA TALUK, POST: YENEKAL-574238, D.K. DISTRICT,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT, 1959.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
16
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27979/2023:
BETWEEN:
AIVARNADU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.3229, AIVARNADU, SULLIA TALUK,
POST: AIVARNADU - 574239,
D.K.DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
S N MANMATHA,
S/O LATE SHESHAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
AIVARNADU, SULLIA TALUK,
POST: AIVARNADU - 574239, D.K.DISTRICT,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT, 1959
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
17
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27988/2023:
BETWEEN:
KALANJA BALILA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO-OP. SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER,
KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETIES ACT, 1959
NO.A.R/37/R.S.R/613/2022-03,
SAHAKARI SADANA, KOTEMUNDUGARU,
POST: KALANJA, SULLIA TALUK - 574212,
D.K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
KOOSAPPA GOWDA,
S/O LATE RAMANNA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/A KALNJA, BALILA,
SULLIA TALK, D.K DISTRICT-574212
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED).
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
18
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27994/2023:
BETWEEN:
MARKANJA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.R.C.1873/60E, SULLIA TALUK,
POST: MARKANJA - 574248, D.K. DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT RAMESH D,
S/O LATE MAHALINGESHWARA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
SULLIA TALUK, POST: MARKANJA-574248,
D.K. DISTRICT
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
19
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.27995/2023:
BETWEEN:
UBARADKA-MITHUR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO. DRP RGN 13763/97-98,
NEAR BUS STAND, SULLIA,
SULLIA TALUK,
POST: UBARADKA-MITHUR - 574248,
D.K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
M. DAMODARA GOWDA,
S/O M KUNHANNA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
SULLIA TALUK,
POST: UBARADKA-MITHUR - 574248,
20
D.K DISTRICT.
(REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES ACT, 1959)
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28013/2023:
BETWEEN:
KEDAMBADY KEYYUR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
THINGALADY, NO. F F 128,
21
PUTTUR TALUK, POST:KEDAMBADY - 574210,
D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
SHASHIDHAR RAO K, S/O LATE ANANDA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
PUTTUR TALUK, POST: KEDAMBADY - 574210, D.K.DISTRICT
(REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT,
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLIAMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28014/2023:
22
BETWEEN:
PANAJE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL
SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.L 372, PANAJE TOWN,
POST: PANAJE - 574 259,
PUTTUR TALUK, D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
PADMANABHA BORKAR,
S/O GOPALAKRISHNA NAYAK B,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
R/AT NIDPALLI VILLAGE,
PUTTUR TALUK, D.K.DISTRICT-574259,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETY ACT,
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
23
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28016/2023:
BETWEEN:
MURULYA ENMUR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.DRP/RGN/13766/1998-99,
ALEKKADI, POST: MURULYA,
SULLIA TALUK - 574328, D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
SMT KUSUMAVATHI RAI K G,
W/O LATE CHANDRASHEKHAR @ KITTANNA RAI
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/A GUTTHU, YENMUR,
SULLIA TALUK - 574328, D K DISTRICT.
REG. UNDER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT,1959
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
24
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28028/2023:
BETWEEN:
CHOKKADY PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.D,R,G/S/2615/76-77, CHOKKADY, SULLIA TALUK,
POST: KUKKUJADKA-574212, D.K. DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
KESHAVA GOWDA KARMAJE,
S/O KRISHNAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
CHOKKADY, SULLIA TALUK,
POST: KUKKUJADKA-574212,
DK DISTRICT,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETY ACT, 1959,
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
25
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A
DT:27/07/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT
ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28089/2023:
BETWEEN:
KAVALAPADUR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO-OP. SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER
KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETIES ACT 1959,
NO. CMW. 243. CLM. 91/96-97,
VAGGA, BATWALA TALUK,
D.K DISTRICT-574265,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
K. PRAMOD KUMAR RAI K,
S/O LATE H NARAYANA RAI,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT VAGGA, BANTWAL TALUK,
D.K DISTRICT-574265.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
26
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28119/2023:
BETWEEN:
VITTAL PADNOOR AGRICULTURAL
SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO. DRG/S/2610/1976-77,
POST: KODANGAYI, BANTWALA TALUK,
D.K DISTRICT-574243,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
K. SUBHASCHANDRA SHETTY,
S/O LATE ANANDA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT KODANGAYI,
BANTWALA TALUK, D.K DISTRICT-574243.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
27
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28229/2023:
BETWEEN:
KAVU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO-OP. SOCIETY REGISTERED
UNDER KARNATAKA CO OP SOCIETIES ACT 1959,
NO DRG/S/2634/1976-77,
KAVU PUTTUR TALUK, POST: KAVU - 574223,
D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
NANYA ACHUTHA MOODETHAYA
S/O SUBRAYA MOODETHAYA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
R/A NANYA KAVU, PUTTUR TALUK,
28
D K DISTRICT - 574223,
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE ANNX-A
IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER CONCERN.
IN WP NO.28231/2023:
BETWEEN:
SAVANOOR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
NO. 2630, SAVANOOR,
29
KADABA TALUK - 574 202,D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
GANESHA NIDAVANNAYA N,
S/O K NARAYANA NIDAVANNAYA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT SAVANOOR, KADABA TALUK - 574 202,
D K DISTRICT
(REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETY ACT, 1959).
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE ANNX-A
IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28235/2023:
30
BETWEEN:
THE PILATHABETTU VYVASAYA SEVA
SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD.,
NO.DRP/RSR/7164/KMC/86-87,
"SUDHANVA" BUILDING
PILATHBETTU VILLAGE,
BANTWAL TALUK,
POST:PUNJALAKATTE - 574233,
DK DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
K LAXMINARAYANA UDUPA,
S/O LATE NARAYANA UDUPA,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
PILATHABETTU VILLAGE,
BANTWALA TALUK,
POST:PUNJALAKATTE-574233,
D.K. DISTRICT,
(REG. UNDER KARNATAKA
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT, 1959)
SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA)
31
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28242/2023:
BETWEEN:
GUTHIGAR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO-OP. SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER
KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETIES ACT, 1959
NO. DRG/S/2622/76-77, GUTHLIGAR,
POST: GUTHIGAR SULLIA TALUK, 574218,
D.K. DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
VENKATRAMANA GOWDA,
S/O LATE PARAMESHWARA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT GUTHIGAR,
SULLIA TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574218.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A. KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
32
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANATHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE ANNX-A
IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28246/2023:
BETWEEN:
1 . AMTADY AGRICULTURAL SERVICE
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.DRG/S /2605/76-77
POST:MODANKAPU,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574 219,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
SMT. MALLIKA V SHETTY,
W/O LATE VASANTH SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT AMTADY POST, MODANKAPU
BANTWAL TALUK, D.K DISTRICT 574 259,
REG. UNDER CO-OP. SOCIETIES ACT 1959.
2 . RAMANNA POOJARY,
S/O GURUVAPPA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS,
R/AT 5-38-3, KANGITHLU HOUSE,
AMTADY VILLAGE, MODANAKAP POST
BANTVAL TALUK , D K DISTRICT - 574 219.
3 . B SURESH BHANDARY,
S/O A VASANTHA BHANDARY,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
33
R/AT 5-55 ARBI HOUSE,
KALLEGE POST AND VILLAGE,
BANTWAL TALUK,
D K DISTRICT 574 219.
4. PADMANABHA RAO,
S/O SUBBA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
R/AT 4-246, KANAPADI HOUSE,
KALLIGE POST AND VILLAGE,
BANTWAL TALUK, D.K.DISTRICT-574219.
(PETITIONER NO. 2 TO 4 SENIOR
CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE-560 001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO OPEARATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARING THAT
THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT
NO. 27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL VOID NOT ENFORCEABLE
AND NON OPERATIVE.
34
IN WP NO.28252/2023:
BETWEEN:
MADAPPADY PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO 3242/60E, SULLIA TALUK
POST MADDAPPADY 574218,
D K DISTRICT,
REP BY ITS PRSENT PRESIDENT
JAYARAMA P C,
S/O CHINNAPAPGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
SULLIA TALUK, POST: MADDAPPADY - 574218
DK DISTRICT,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETY ACT,1959
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A.KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE-560 001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO OPEARATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS
35
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER CONCERN.
IN WP NO.28273/2023:
BETWEEN:
KUMBRA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO-OP. SOCIETY REGISTERED
UNDER KARNATAKA CO OP. SOCIETIES ACT, 1959
NO.DRG/S/2629/1976-77,
KUMBRA, VALAMOGRU VILLAGE,
PUTTUR TALUK, POST-KUMBRA-574211,
DK DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
PRAKASHCHANDRA RAI K,
S/O LATE VITTAL RAI,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT KUMBRA, PUTTUR TALUK, DK DISTRICT-574210.
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETY ACT, 1959
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A.KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE-560 001.
3. THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO OPEARATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
36
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28278/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. BANNUR RAITARA SEVA SAHAKARI
SANGHA LIMITED,
NO.D.R G/S/2632/76-77,
BOLWAR, PUTTUR TALUK,
POST: PUTTUR - 574 201, D.K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
ISHWARA BHAT P, S/O LATE KESHAVA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
BOLWAR, PUTTUR TALUK,
POST: PUTTUR - 574 201, D.K DISTRICT.
(REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETY ACT, 1959)
2. ISHWAR BHAT P,
S/O LATE KESHAVA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT PANJIGUDDE HOUSE,
PADNUR VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574 201.
3. RAJASHEKAR JAIN N,
S/O PADMARAJA N,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
R/AT NEERAJE HOUSE,
BANNURU VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK,
D.K DISTRICT - 574 201.
4. JAYALAKSHMI SURESH,
W/O SURESH B .U,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT KEPULU HOUSE,
CHIKKAMUDNOOR VILLAGE AND POST,
PUTTUR POST AND TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574 201.
37
(PETITIONER NO.3 SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT
CLAIMED).
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT
ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE IN SO FAR PETITIONERS
ARE CONCERNED.
IN WP NO.28281/2023:
BETWEEN:
1 . KALIYA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
38
NO.1316, SHRESHTA BUILDING,
BELTHANGADY TLAUK,
POST: GERUKATTE - 574217,
D.K. DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
VASANTHA MAJAL M,
S/O LATE BANTAPPA NAIK,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
BELTHANGADY TALUK,
POST: GERUKATTE - 574217, D.K. DISTRICT.
2 . SHEKHARA NAIKA,
S/O CHANDU NAIKA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT SPOORTHI HOUSE,
KALIYA VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK,
D.K, DISTRICT 574217.
3 . RATHNAKARA POOJARY,
S/O GUMMANNA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT BALLIDADDA HOUSE,
KALIYA VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK,
D.K. DISTRICT - 574217.
4 . RAJPRAKASH SHETTY,
S/O BABU SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT PADDAIL HOUSE,
VODILNALA VILLAGE AND POST,
BELTHANGADY TALUK,
D.K. DISTRICT - 574217.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
39
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE KARNATAKA CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY
KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE IN SO FAR PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED.
IN WP NO.28284/2023:
BETWEEN:
ALETTY PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO. 3379, ALETTY, SULLIA TALUK,
D.K.DISTRICT,
REPRESENTGED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
KARUNAKARA H,
S/O VISHWANATHA MANIYANI M,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT ALETTY, SULLIA TALUK,
POST: ALLETY-574329, D.K.DISTRICT.
(REG. UNDER KARNATAKA
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT, 1959)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
40
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A DTD:27.07.2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28285/2023:
BETWEEN:
KOKKADA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
A CO-OP.SOCIETY REGISTERED
UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETIES ACT, 1959
NO.F.F.4430,KOKKADA, BELTHANGADY TALUK,
DK DISTRICT-574198,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT
P KUSHALAPPA GOWDA,
S/O LATE GANAPPANA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
R/A PATRAME, BELTHANGADY TALUK,
DK DISTRICT-574198,
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED).
41
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER AS CONCERNED.
IN WP NO.28297/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. KAVALA MUDUR AGRICULTURAL SERVICE
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO-OP SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER
KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETIES ACT 1959
NO.D.R.P/DA.D.M/C.R/29/R.G.N.13751/94-95
KAVALAKATTE BANTWAL TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 265,
42
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
B PADMASHEKAR KUMAR,
S/O B SANATH KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R./AT KAVALAKATTE POST,
KAVALAKATTE, BANTWAL TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574265.
2. PRAMOD KUMAR,
S/O LATE P VASUDEVA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT PADANTHRABETTU HOUSE,
KAVALAMADUR VILLAGE,
POST: KAVALAKTTE, TALUK: BANTWALA,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 265.
3. MOHAMMAD SALIYA,
S/O LATE ADAM SAHEB,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT BOMMIKKU HOUSE,
KAVALAMUDUR VILLAGE,
POST: KAVALAKATTE, TALUK: BANTWALA,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574265.
4. HEMANTH KUMAR,
S/O LATE MAILAPPA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT PEJATHRODY HOUSE,
KAVALAMUDUR VILLAGE,
POST: KAVALAKATTE, TALUK: BANTWALA,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574265.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
43
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT
ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE IN SO FAR AS
PETITIONER AGE CONCERNED.
IN WP NO. 28341/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. KAIRANGALA AGRICULTURAL SERVICE
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
REG. UNDER SOCIETY ACT,
NO. DRG/S/2606/1976-77,
KAIRANGALA, POST, KAIRANGALA
ULLALA TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574153.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
M MAHESH CHOWTA,
S/O RAMAKRISHNA CHOWTA,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
R/A CHAKRAKODI,
BALEPUNI VILLAGE AND POST,
ULLALA TALUK, D K DISTRICT -574153.
2. MAHAMMAD MUNEER,
S/O ABDUL KHADAR,
AGEDF ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/AT THOTAL HOUSE,
KAIRANGALA VILLAGE AND POST,
44
BANTHWALA TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574 153.
3. UDAYA SHANAKR,
S/O BALAKRISHNA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT BALATHODU HOUSE,
NARINGANA VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTHWALA TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574 153.
4. JANARDHANA K,
S/O SANKAPPA GATTI,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
R/AT KANNIMANE HOUSE,
KAIRANGALA VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTHWALA TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574 153.
(PETITIONER NO.1 & 4 SENIOR
CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
45
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE VIDE ANNEXURE-A.
IN WP NO.28353/2023:
BETWEEN:
KADABA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
NO.DRG/S/2631/76-77,
KADABA, KADABA TALUK,
POST KADABA-574221
D.K.DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
RAMESH KALPURE,
S/O NARAYANA BHAT K,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
KADABA, KADABA TALUK,
POST: KADABA - 574221, D.K.DISTRICT
D.K.DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
46
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
ISSUE DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF
THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 ANNEXURE-A,
DTD 27.02.2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT
ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28384/2023:
BETWEEN:
1 . NELLYADY PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
A CO OP. SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER
REGD. NO. 145, NELLYADY,
NELLADY VILLAGE AND POST - 574229,
KADABA TLAUK, D.K. DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
UMESH SHETTY, S/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
R/A NELLYADY, KADABA TALUK,
D.K. DISTRICT - 574 229,
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED).
2. BALAKRISHNA B,
S/O KRISHNAPPA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT BANAJALU HOUSE,
KOWKRADY VILLAGE, KADABA TALUK,
D.K. DISTRICT - 574229.
3. KAMALAKSHA,
S/O SHIVAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT VENKATARAMANA NILAYA,
GOLITHOTTU VILLAGE, KADABA TALUK,
D.K. DISTRICT - 574229.
4. JAYANANDA P,
47
S/O SHIVAPPA BANTRIYAL,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT KELAGINA PARARI HOUSE,
NELLYADY VILLAGE, KADABA TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT - 574 229.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
ISSUE DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF
THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28397/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. ALANKARU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
48
NO DRG/S/2628/1976-77,
ALANKARU KADABA TALUK,
POST: ALANKARU - 574285,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
DHARMAPALA RAO K,
S/O KRISHNAYYA HEGDE,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
R/AT ALANKARU,KADABA TALUK - 574 285
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP.
SOCIETY ACT, 1959,
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
2. PRADEEP RAI,
S/O SANJEEVA RAI,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT MANAVALIKE HOUSE,
PERABE POST AND VILLAGE,
KADABA TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574285.
3. CHANDRA DEVADIGA,
S/O KRISHNAPPA DEVADIGA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT NAGRI HOUSE,
ALANKARI POST AND VILLAGE,
KADABA TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574285.
4. PUNITH S,
S/O KITTANNA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT SURULI HOUSE,
PERABE POST AND VILLAGE,
KADABA TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574285.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
49
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
ISSUE DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF
THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT
ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.28646/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. SIDDAKATTE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL
SOCIETY LIMITED AND OTHERS,
NO.F F 124/1947,
BANTWAKL TALUK,
POST: SIDDAKATTE - 574237, D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
PRABHAKARA PRABHU,
S/O LATE SADASHIVA PRABHU,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
BANTWAL TALUK,POST: SIDDAKATTE - 574237,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT
KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETY ACT NO.11 OF 1959
50
2. KRISHNA PRABHU,
S/O VASUDEVA PRABHU,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
R/AT PARLA HOUSE, KARPE VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTWAL TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574237,
SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED.
3. JANARDHANA K,
S/O CHANDU POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT KODANGE HOUSE,
ARAMBODY VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574237,
SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED.
4. RAJEEVI,
W/O SHRIDHARA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT KUKKURI HOUSE,
KARPE VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTWAL TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574237.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
51
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A DTD 27.07.2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID,
NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.7450/2024:
BETWEEN:
1. VITTAL VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKRI
SANGA LIMITED,
NO DRG/S/2612/76-77,
VITTAL POST VITTAL,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574243,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
N NARSAPPA POOJARY,
S/O BABU YANE ISHWARA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
VITTAL, POST VITTAL,
BANTWAL TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574243,
REG UNDER KARNATAKA CO OP SOCIETY ACT 1959,
(PETITIONER NO 1 IS SENIOR CITIZEN
BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
2. A MAHABALESHWARA BHAT,
S/O A RAMACHANDRA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT ALANGARU HOUSE,
VITTAL MUDNOOR VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574243.
3. UDAYA KUMAR,
S/O LATE RUKUMA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT NAITHOTTU HOUSE,
VITTAL KASABA VILLAGE,
52
MANGALA PADAVU POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574243.
4. SADANANDA,
S/O LATE SUBBANNA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT DEPPINI HOUSE,
VITTAL KASABA VILLAGE, VITTAL POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574243.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT
ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.7451/2024:
53
BETWEEN:
1. BILINELE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT CO-OP. SOCIETY LIMITED AND ORS,
NO.608, BILINELE VILLAGE,
NETTANA POST, KADABA TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574230,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
DAMODARA D M, S/O LATE MONAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT DERANE HOUSE,
SHIRIBAGILU VILLAGE, GUNDYA POST,
KADABA TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574229,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO OP. SOCIETY ACT 1959
2. VENKATARAMANA GOWDA,
S/O DEVANNA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
R/AT BAILU HOUSE, BILINELE VILLAGE,
NETTANA POST, KADABA TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574230.
3. UMAVATHI,
W/O KUSHALAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/AT SOODLU KALIGE HOUSE,
BILINELE VILLAGE, NETTANA POST,
KADABA TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574230.
4. CHENNAKESHAVA
S/O DEVANNA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT KAINTHILA HOUSE,
KOMBARU VILLAGE AND POST,
KADABA TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574230.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
54
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE SOCIETIES,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT
ENFORCEABLE AND NON OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.7452/2024:
BETWEEN:
1. PERNE VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGA LIMITED
NO. DRP/S9/RGN/25929/05-06,
PERNE VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574325,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
THOYAJAKSHA SHETTY S,
S/O LATE RAMANNA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
PERNE VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574325.
2. THANIYAPPA POOJARY,
S/O DUGGAPPA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT NADUPALU HOUSE,
55
BILIYOOR VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574325.
3. SUNI NELSON PINTO
S/O ANTHONI PINTO,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT KORATHIKATTE HOUSE,
PERNE POST AND VILLAGE,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574325.
4. NEELAPPA GOWDA,
S/O RAMANNA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT KALENJA HOUSE, PERNE VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574325.
(PETITIONER NO.1 & 2 SENIOR CITIZEN
BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
56
DIRECT, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.7490/2024:
BETWEEN:
1. ALIKE VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARI
SANGA LIMITED,
NO 3969, ALIKE VILLAGE,
ATHYASAIVIHARA POST, BANTWAL TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574235,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
KANA ISHWARA BHAT,
S/O LATE GANAPATHI BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
ALIKE VILLAGE,
SATHYASAIVIHARA POST,BANTWAL TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574235,
REG UNDER KARNATAKA CO OP SOCIETY ACT 1959
SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED.
2. VASANTHA A,
S/O PAKEERA MOOLYA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT YERUMBU HOUSE,
ALIKE VILLAGE, SATHYASAIVIHARA POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574235,
SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED.
3. CHANDRAKANTHA ALWA M,
S/O SANKAYYA ALWA,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
R/AT MATHALIKE HOUSE,
ALIKE VILLAGE, SATHYASAIVIHAR POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574235,
SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED.
4. ROOPESH RAI,
S/O NARAYANA RAI,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
57
ALIKE VILLAGE,
SATHYASAIVIHARA POST,BANTWAL TALUK,
D K DISTRICT - 574235.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.7552/2024:
BETWEEN:
1. NERALAKATTE SAHAKARI VYAVASAYIKA
SANGHA LIMITED,
NO.2694, NERALAKLATTE VILLAGE,
NERALAKATTE POST, BANTWAL TALUK,
58
D K DISTRICT - 574253,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT
PUSHPARAJA CHOWTA,
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA CHOWTA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
NERALAKLATTE VILLAGE, NERALAKATTE POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574253,
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPP SOCIETY ACT 1959.
2. THANIYAPPA GOWDA D,
S/O AITHAPPA GOWDA D,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT DASAKODI HOUSE,
NETLAMUDNUR VILLAGE, NERALAKATTE POST,
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574253,
SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED.
3. SANATH KUMAR RAI,
S/O MAHABALA RAI,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT TUMBEKODI HOUSE,
ANANTHADI VILLAGE AND POST
BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574253.
4. SUDHAKARA P,
S/O CHANNAPPA NAIK,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
PANOOR PERAJE VILLAGE,
BUDOLI POST, BANTWAL TALUK
D K DISTRICT - 574253.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
59
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD,
VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.7566/2024:
BETWEEN:
1. ARYAPU PRIMARY AGIRCULTURAL CREDIT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
DRG/263/76-77, ARYAPU, PUTTUR TALUK,
POST: ARYAPU - 574210, D.K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
H.MAHAMMADH ALI,
S/O LATE IBRAHIM H H,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
ARYAUP, PUTTUR TALUK,
POST: ARYAPU - 574210,
D.K DISTRICT,
REG UNDER KARNATAKA
CO. OPP SOCIETY ACT 1959.
60
2. SADANANDA SHETTY,
S/O NARAYANA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
KORELU HOUSE, ARYAPU,
PUTTUR TALUK,
POST: ARYAPU - 574210,
D.K DISTRICT,
NOT CLAIM THE BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN.
3. GANESH RAI,
S/O SHESHAPPA RAI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
MODAPPADY MOOLE HOUSE,
ARYAPU, PUTTUR TALUK,
POST: ARYAPU - 574210,
D.K DISTRICT.
4. ISMAYIL M,
S/O ABDUL RAHIMAN,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
MALAR HOUSE,
KURIYA VILLAGE AND POST,
PUTTUR TALUK,
D.K DISTRICT-574210.
...PETITIONERS
(BY MR A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
61
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD,
VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE AND NON
OPERATIVE.
IN WP NO.8460/2024:
BETWEEN:
PUNACHA PRATHAMIKA VYAVASAYA
SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD.,
NO. DRG/S/2609/76-77,
PUNACHA VILLAGE AND POST,
BANTWAL TALUK - 574243,
D K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT,
JANARDHANA BHAT,
S/O NARAYANA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
PUNACHA VILLAGE,
POST: PUNACHA - 574 243,
BANTWAL TALUK,
D K DISTRICT.
REG. UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OP. SOCIETIES ACT 1959.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
62
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2 . THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPEARATIVE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
3 . THE REGISTRAR,
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD,
VASANTHA NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SMT AMARAVATHY H R, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE SECTION 128A OF THE
KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT WHICH WAS
INTRODUCED BY KARNATAKA ACT NO.27/2023 ANN-A DTD
27/07/2023 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID, NOT ENFORCEABLE
AND NON OPERATIVE.
THESE PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR ORDERS ON 18TH JUNE, 2024 AND COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE
FOLLOWING:
63
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
CAV ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
1. Section 128-A of the Karnataka Co-operative
Societies Act, 1959 (for short 'Act of 1959') has a weird
history to tell. It successfully withstood the challenge to its
constitutional validity in 1986. However, the said provision is
omitted vide Ordinance No.8 of 2009. On 29.03.2010,
provision (re-numbered as 128-A) makes a comeback. And
on 01.07.2020, said provision is once again omitted. On
27.07.2023, Section 128-A again finds its place in the Act of
1959, vide Act No.27/2023.
2. But for a hyphen between '128' and 'A', the
provision is a replica of Section 128-A, which has been
declared 'intra vires', in PCLD Bank Vs. State of
Karnataka1. However, in this batch of petitions, the
provision once again faces the challenge to its constitutional
validity.
1
ILR 1986 Karnataka 427
64
3. Some of the petitioners are the Primary
Co-operative Societies registered under the Act of 1959,
others are the members or office bearers of the Primary
co-operative societies.
4. Quite obviously, the State and the interveners
(Federal Societies) have raised the following preliminary
objections to the maintainability of the Writ Petitions.
(a) The identical provision (Section 128-A) as it stood
in 1986, is held to be constitutional by the Division Bench in
PCLD Bank, supra. Thus, the principle of res judicata
applies, as such the Writ Petitions are not maintainable.
(b) The Writ Petitions are premature; there is no cause
of action as the Registrar of co-operative societies
('Registrar' for short) has not implemented the Regulations
under Section 128-A of the Act of 1959. The right to
challenge will accrue only in case, the Regulations violate the
fundamental rights of the members of the Society.
5. Section 128-A of the Act of 1959 was introduced
by way of amendment vide Act No.27/2023. The amended
provision reads as under:
65
"128-A. Constitution of a common cadre.
1. Notwithstanding anything contained in
this Act, the rules or the bye-laws, where the
Registrar, in the interest of the co-operative
movement, considers that the creation of a
common cadre of employees for any class of co-
operative societies is necessary, he shall authorize
one or more federal societies to which such class of
co-operative societies is affiliated to exercise the
power of appointment, transfer and disciplinary
action in respect of such categories of employees
of that class of co-operative societies as may be
specified by him and make such regulations as
may be necessary for carrying out the said
purpose. Where such federal society is so
authorised by the Registrar, the affiliated co-
operative societies shall not have powers to deal
with such categories of employees except to the
extent the regulations may permit.
2. The Registrar shall have the power to
require the affiliated co-operative societies to make
contribution of such sum every year towards
expenditure, as the federal society is likely to incur
or has incurred for the purpose. If any co-
operative society fails to pay the said sum to such
authority as may be specified by the Registrar and
within the time fixed by him, the Registrar may on
66
the application of the authority, and after such
enquiry as he may consider necessary, make an
order requiring the co-operative society to pay the
amount, and every such order shall be enforceable
against the co-operative society as if it were an
award under Section 71."
6. The 97th amendment to the Constitution of India,
came into effect on 15.02.2012. The relevant amendments
for the discussion in these petitions are the amendment to
Article 19(1)(c) and the introduction of Article 43-B.
7. On the plea of res judicata. The plea of res
judicata is not available. It is indeed true that the
constitutional validity of Section 128-A was upheld by the
Division Bench of this Court, in 1986, in PCLD Bank supra.
Said provision was omitted later, and re-introduced in 2023.
However, significant developments have taken place since
the validity of the said provision was upheld in 1986.
8. The 97th amendment to the Constitution of India,
amended Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India in
2012. The expression "co-operative societies" was introduced
in Article 19(1)(c). And a whole new Article 43-B is also
67
introduced. The Act of 1959 is amended. But for these
amendments, the challenge to the constitutional validity of
Section 128-A would have been hit by the principle of res
judicata. However, post the judgment in PCLD Bank supra,
the right to form a co-operative society is a 'fundamental
right'. Further, there is also a constitutional mandate on the
State in the form of Directive Principle in Article 43-B of the
Constitution of India, to promote voluntary formation,
autonomous functioning, and democratic control in
Co-operative Sector. In addition, the Act of 1959 itself is
amended incorporating the constitutional aspirations
envisaged in Article 43-B of the Constitution of India.
9. The premise on which the challenge is leveled has
undergone a huge change, since the judgment in PCLD
Bank supra in 1986 because of the 97th amendment to the
Constitution of India which came into effect in 2012. The
second challenge is a post-97th amendment to the
Constitution of India. Thus, the second challenge is on a new
legal ground which was not legally available at the time of
the first challenge. For this reason, even the plea of
constructive res judicata is not available. These subsequent
68
changes in the regime of law will obliterate the technical plea
of res judicata. Thus, the petitions merit consideration on
merits.
10. On the plea that the Writ Petitions are
premature for want of cause of action:
a. Section 128-A of the Act of 1959 enables the Registrar
to frame Regulations in respect of three matters
namely, recruitment, transfer, and disciplinary action
concerning the employees of co-operative societies.
The Registrar may confer the power on these three
matters on a Federal Society to which such
co-operative societies are affiliated. Before the
introduction of Section 128-A of the Act of 1959, the
power to recruit, transfer, and hold disciplinary action
is with co-operative societies. Section 128-A which
confers the power on the Registrar to frame
Regulations on certain matters which are within the
powers of the Primary co-operative societies, has
immense potential to take away those rights hitherto
exercised by the petitioners. Thus, there is a cause of
action to the petitioners to file a Writ Petition. Indeed,
69
the Regulations under the impugned provision have not
yet been brought into action. However, the State
admits that the Regulations are framed, and but for the
interim stay order, the Regulations would have come
into force. This being the position, the contention that
the Writ Petitions are premature holds no water.
b. More than anything else, when the challenge stems
from the premise that the State has no power to
authorise the Registrar to confer such power on federal
Society, the petitioners need not wait for the
Regulations to be framed under the impugned
provision. Thus, there is cause of action and Writ
Petitions are not pre-mature.
c. The reliance placed by the respondents on the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Kusum Ignots
and Alloys Ltd vs. Union of India2 is not of much
avail to the respondents as the Constitution Bench of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in earlier judgment in K.K.
Kochunni vs. State of Madras3 is not brought to the
notice in Kusum Ignots supra. In K.K. Kochunni
2
(2004) 6 SCC 254
3
AIR 1959 SC 725
70
supra, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the Writ
Petition challenging the constitutional validity of a
provision is maintainable, even before overt action is
taken pursuant to the provision under challenge.
Therefore, this Court is of the view that the petitions
are not premature and there is a cause of action as the
petitioners contend that the provision conferring the
power on certain matters specified in Section128-A of
the Act of 1959 on the Registrar itself is
unconstitutional.
11. On the challenge to the constitutional
validity:
Now the question is whether Section 128-A of Act of
1959 violates the rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c) of
Constitution of India?
12. The learned counsel for the petitioners urged
that:
• Article 19(1)(c) is amended pursuant to the 97th
amendment to the Constitution of India. In addition to
making the right to form a co-operative society, a
71
fundamental right by inserting the expression
"co-operative societies" in Article 19(1)(c), a new
Article 43-B is also introduced. The said Article enjoins
the State to endeavor to promote voluntary formation,
autonomous functioning, democratic control, and
professional management of Co-operative Societies.
• Pursuant to the 97thamendment to the Constitution of
India, in 2013, the Act of 1959 is suitably amended.
The introductory portion of the Act of 1959
incorporated the very object envisaged in Article 43-B
of the Constitution of India.
• The fundamental right to form a co-operative society
includes certain fundamental aspects of management of
a co-operative society. The right to recruit, transfer the
employees, and the right to initiate disciplinary
proceedings are fundamental aspects associated with
the formation of a co-operative society, and if such
rights are taken away, then it violates the fundamental
right guaranteed under the Constitution of India.
• The restrictions in the impugned provision are not
reasonable to claim protection under Article 19(4) of
72
the Constitution of India and that Section 128-A of the
Act of 1959 confers unguided excessive power on the
Registrar to make Regulations in respect of matters
enumerated therein and as such said provision is
arbitrary and unconstitutional.
• The amendment does not seek to achieve the object
sought to be achieved and there is no rational nexus
between the object and the amendment.
• The petitioner Societies are not "Assisted Societies" and
there is no Government investment in the petitioner
Societies. Thus, the State cannot interfere in the
matter of recruitment, transfer and disciplinary action.
13. Sri Shashikiran Shetty, the learned Advocate
General, appearing for the respondent State, urged that:
• Post 97th constitutional amendment, the law similar to
the one under challenge is held to be valid by the
Madras High Court in C. Manoharan vs. State of
Tamil Nadu4.
4
2019 SCC OnLine Mad 7136
73
• The Society not being a citizen cannot maintain the
petition complaining of violation of fundamental rights.
• Though, right to form a co-operative society is a
fundamental right, said right stands exercised and
fulfilled on its formation. There is no fundamental right
to recruit, transfer and hold disciplinary action against
the employees.
• The autonomous functioning recognized under the Act
of 1959 cannot be construed to hold that the State has
no control over matters like recruitment, transfer, or a
matter concerning disciplinary action against
employees of a co-operative society.
• The State has the power to impose reasonable
restrictions under Article 19(4) of the Constitution of
India.
• The word "public order" in Entry No.1 of VII Schedule is
wide enough to take care of the public safety of
members of political society. Section 128-A which is
introduced by way of an amendment, has the solemn
74
object of curbing financial irregularities in the
co-operative societies, and ensuring public safety.
14. The learned Senior counsel Sri M.R. Rajgopal
appearing for the interveners Federal Societies urged that:
• The provision is inserted to curb the menace of
misappropriation of funds in co-operative societies.
• The provision though will take away the power to
recruit, transfer, and to hold disciplinary action, it is
only a reasonable restriction and it will not violate the
fundamental right to form the co-operative society. The
right to form a co-operative society is very much intact
and the restrictions sought to be imposed will not come
in the way of the co-operative society carrying out its
business.
• The large-scale misappropriation of funds at the level of
Primary co-operative societies necessitated the
amendment in the form of Section 128-A and the
amended provision seeks to serve the object behind
75
the amendment which aims at curtailing financial
misappropriation.
• There is a presumption to the Constitutional validity of
a provision or a law, and it is presumed that the
parliament or legislature has the necessary wisdom to
bring the law in the best interest of citizens and such
legislative wisdom cannot be lightly brushed aside. A
strong case is to be made out to strike down a
provision as unconstitutional, and the Courts should be
extremely slow in striking down a law.
• Section 128-A has enough inbuilt safeguards. The
power conferred on the Registrar is not an absolute
power without any restriction. The Registrar can frame
regulations only in the interest of Co-operative
movement and not otherwise. In addition, such power
is given to the highest authority of the State under the
Act of 1959, and the highest authority is presumed to
have the necessary wisdom and experience to
discharge the obligations in accordance with law. Mere
absence of guidelines for framing the Regulations
76
cannot be termed as excessive delegation and on that
score, the provision cannot be struck down.
15. It is a settled position of law that there is a
presumption in favour of the constitutional validity of the
law. The burden is on the person who questions the
constitutional validity to demonstrate that the law is ultra
vires.
16. In the light of the contentions raised, the primary
question that needs consideration is:
Whether the right to form a co-operative society
under Article 19(1)(c) which admittedly is a
fundamental right extends only till its formation
and registration?
or
Whether the right to form a co-operative society
under Article 19(1)(c) within its amplitude also
includes the right to recruit and transfer the
employees, and to initiate disciplinary action
against its employees?
a. If the 'fundamental right' to form a co-operative society
is only a right that ends or stands exercised or fulfilled
once a co-operative society is formed, and does not
77
extend beyond such formation or registration, then the
right to recruit, transfer and initiate disciplinary action
over the employees of the
co-operative society cannot be a fundamental right
associated with the fundamental right to form a
co-operative society. And in that event, the challenge
to Section 128-A is not tenable.
b. If the formation of a co-operative society which is
admittedly a fundamental right, also encompasses
within its fold the right to carry out certain fundamental
aspects like recruitment, transfer, and disciplinary
action over employees, then the restrictions imposed in
Section 128-A will have to be shown as reasonable to
save the provision.
17. Amendment to Article 19(1)(c) has taken place
simultaneously with insertion of Article 43-B, and a lot of
emphasis is laid on Article 43-B, falling in part IV of the
Constitution of India. It is necessary to refer to some of the
judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court on the Directive
Principles of the State Policy.
78
18. In Pathumma vs. State of Kerala5, the seven-
Judge Constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court has
held that while deciding the reasonableness of restrictions
imposed in Article 19(5), the Court has to bear in mind the
Directive Principles of the State Policy. In paragraphs No.9
and 10, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:-
"9. In fact in the case of His Holiness
Kesavananda Bharati Sripadaga-lavaru v. State of
Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225: 1973 Supp SCR 1 all the
Judges constituting the Bench have with one voice
given the Directive Principles contained in the
Constitution a place of honour. Hegde and
Mukherjee, JJ. as they then were have said that the
fundamental rights and the Directive Principles
constitute the "conscience" of our Constitution. The
purpose of the Directive Principles is to fix certain
social and economic goals for immediate attainment
by bringing about a non-violent social revolution.
Chandrachud, J. observed that our Constitution aims
at bringing about a synthesis between "Fundamental
Rights" and the "Directive Principles of State Policy"
by giving to the former a place of pride and to the
latter a place of permanence."
5
AIR 1978 SC 771
79
10. In a later case State of Kerala v. N.M.
Thomas (1976) 2 SCC 310: 1976 SCC (L&S) 227
one of us (Fazal Ali, J.) after analysing the judgment
delivered by all the Judges in the Kesavananda
Bharati case on the importance of the Directive
Principles observed as follows;
"In view of the principles adumbrated by this
Court, it is clear that the Directive Principles form the
fundamental feature and the social conscience of the
Constitution and the Constitution enjoins upon the
State to implement these directive principles. The
directives thus provide the policy, the guidelines, and
the end of socio-economic freedom, and Articles 14
and 16 are the means to implement the policy to
achieve the ends sought to be promoted by the
directive principles. So far as the Courts are
concerned where there is no apparent inconsistency
between the directive principles contained in Part IV
and the fundamental rights mentioned in Part III,
which supplement each other, there is no difficulty in
putting a harmonious construction which advances
the object of the Constitution. Once this basic fact is
kept in mind, the interpretation of Articles 14 and 16
and their scope and ambit become as clear as day."
80
19. In Kasthurilal vs. State of Jammu and
Kashmir6, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:
"12. Xxxx The directive principles concretise and
give shape to the concept of reasonableness
envisaged in Articles 14, 19, and 21 and other
Articles enumerating the fundamental rights. By
defining the national aims and the constitutional
goals, they set forth the standards or norms of
reasonableness that must guide and animate
governmental action. Any action taken by the
Government to give effect to anyone or more of the
directive principles would ordinarily, subject to any
constitutional or legal inhibitions or other overriding
considerations, qualify for being regarded as
reasonable, while an action that is inconsistent with
or runs counter to a directive principle would prima
facie incur the reproach of being unreasonable."
(Emphasis supplied)
20. In the light of the law laid down in the above
referred cases, this Court has to necessarily read the
fundamental right to form a co-operative society conferred
under Article 19(1)(c) through the prism of Article 43-B. If
not, the true flavor, fragrance, and dimension of
6
(1980) 4 SCC 1
81
fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c) will be
obscured.
21. At this juncture, it is also necessary to refer to
the relevant portion of objects and reasons behind the 97th
amendment of the Constitution as well as the 2013
amendment to the Act of 1959. The relevant portion of the
statement of objects and reasons for the 97th amendment to
the Constitution of India is as under:-
"STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS"
The co-operative sector, over the years, has
made significant contributions to various sectors of
the national economy and has achieved
voluminous growth. However, it has shown
weaknesses in safeguarding the interests of the
members and fulfillment of objects for which these
institutions were organised. There have been
instances where elections have been postponed
indefinitely and nominated office bearers or
administrators remaining incharge 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
82
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 revitalize 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. The "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 Cooperative 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
83
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.
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 endeavor to promote voluntary
formation, autonomous functioning, democratic
control and professional management of
cooperative societies. The proposed new Part in
the Constitution, inter alia, seeks to empower the
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
84
principles of democratic member-control, member-
economic participation and autonomous
functioning;
(b) xxx;
(c) xxx;
(d) xxx;
(e) xxx;
(f) xxx;
(g) xxx;
(h) xxx;
(i) xxx;
4. It is expected that these provisions will not only
ensure the autonomous and democratic functioning of
cooperatives 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. 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
85
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 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
86
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 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.
87
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
88
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 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
89
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 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
90
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.
32. The next question is; whether Section 128-A of
the Act of 1959 which is under challenge imposes only a
reasonable restrictions which are permissible under Article
19(4) of the Constitution of India?
33. The provision under scrutiny enables the
Registrar to create a common cadre of employees for any
class of co-operative societies. It also enables the Registrar
to authorize a Federal Society to exercise the power of
recruitment, transfer, and disciplinary action in respect of
such class of employees of co-operative societies as he may
specify and to make such regulations necessary to carry out
the said purpose.
91
34. The provision also provides that once the power is
conferred on a federal society to recruit, transfer, and initiate
disciplinary action in respect of employees of a Primary
co-operative society then those Primary Co-operative
Societies which are affiliated to the said Federal Society shall
not have the power over the matters conferred on the
Federal Society.
35. As can be noticed, once the Registrar frames
Regulations under Section 128-A, the right of the Primary
co-operative society over recruitment, transfer and
disciplinary action gets extinguished. Does this amount to a
reasonable restriction or unreasonable restriction infringing
upon the fundamental right is the question.
36. The learned Advocate General appearing for the
respondent-State as well as the learned Senior counsel
appearing for the intervening applicants would urge that the
Registrar has framed the Regulations only to regulate the
recruitment of the Chief Executive Officer of a co-operative
society and the rest of the employees of the co-operative
society are not covered under the Regulations. Thus, it is
92
urged that Section 128-A in its operation is made applicable
by the Registrar only concerning the recruitment, transfer,
and disciplinary action against the Chief Executive Officer of
a co-operative society. Thus, the restrictions are reasonable.
There is no invasion of the fundamental right guaranteed
under Article 19(1)(c) and there is no interference in the
autonomous functioning of a co-operative society.
37. It is an admitted position that the Chief Executive
Officer of a co-operative society is head of the rest of the
employees of a co-operative society. The post of Chief
Executive Officer is very much recognized in the Act of 1959
and his rights, duties, and responsibilities are also statutorily
defined. When the members of a group come together with
the object of forming a co-operative society to achieve the
purpose set out in the bye-law, and when the law recognizes
that those persons have autonomy in the functioning of the
Society, the right to choose the suitable person to manage
and run the co-operative society, is also a facet of the
fundamental right to form the co-operative society and the
autonomous functioning of a co-operative society.
93
38. Though, it is urged that the Registrar in his
discretion keeping in mind the interest of the co-operative
movement has only decided to confer the power of
recruitment of the Chief Executive Officer of a co-operative
society, and has not disturbed the power of the co-operative
society to recruit other employees, the said contention does
not come to the aid of the State in a challenge to the
provision resting on a premise that the provision has
conferred unguided power on the Registrar to frame
Regulations curtailing the right to recruit, transfer and
disciplinary action of any class of employees of a
co-operative society. Thus, for the State to defend the
provision, it is of no defence to contend that the provision
though confers the wide power, the authority under the
impugned provision is exercising self-restraint on the power
conferred.
39. This being the position, this Court cannot
conclude that the vast unguided powers conferred on the
Registrar of co-operative societies under Section 128-A are
reasonable. On the other hand, the said powers encroach
upon the rights of the members of the co-operative society
94
who enjoy a certain degree of autonomy in the functioning of
a co-operative society which extends to recruitment and
transfer of employees which are essential and fundamental
to the functioning of the co-operative society. This Court is of
the view that the power to recruit, transfer, and disciplinary
action is fundamental in character in running the co-
operative society cannot be taken away by the State and
such power cannot be conferred on a third party (Federal
Society) which has no role in the formation of a co-operative
society.
40. In the backdrop of Article 19(1)(c) read with
Article 43-B, and for the reasons assigned above, the powers
conferred on the Registrar under Section 128-A, will impose
prohibition on the matters covered in the Regulations framed
under the provision. It is evident in Section 128-A (1) which
says "Where such federal society is so authorized by the
Registrar, the affiliated co-operative societies shall not have
powers to deal with such categories of employees except to
the extent the regulations may permit". Thus, the
Regulations cease to be regulations and they amount to
prohibition on the matters covered by the Regulations, and
95
thus they become unreasonable, manifestly arbitrary and
encroach upon the fundamental rights.
41. The contention of the State that huge money
flowing from the Government schemes payable beneficiaries
are routed through Primary co-operative societies is not a
ground to take away the power of recruitment of employees
of co-operative society. At the end of the day, the
co-operative society is nothing but a self-help group which
has the protection under Article 19(1)(c) of Constitution of
India.
42. Though, the learned Advocate General appearing
for the respondent-State and the learned Senior counsel
appearing for the respondent urged that the right to file a
Writ Petition complaining about violation of Article 19(1)(c)
of the Constitution of India is not available to the Societies
on the premise that the fundamental right under Article 19 is
guaranteed to the citizens and not to the Societies or juristic
persons. It is to be noticed that the fundamental right is
conferred on the citizens who form the Society. The said
fundamental right to form a co-operative society has to be
96
exercised only by the members. After the registration of the
co-operative society, the members collectively pursue the
activity of the co-operative society in the name of the
co-operative society. In the case of Akshay N. Patel v.
Reserve Bank of India7, the Hon'ble Apex Court has
considered on merit the petition filed by the Managing
Director of a Corporation challenging the constitutional
validity. In the said judgment, in paragraph No.11, the
Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that over the years
shareholders and business persons have filed petitions in
their individual capacity alleging infringement of the
fundamental right to carry on business or a profession of
their choice. This being the position, this Court is of the view
that a Writ Petition filed by the members of the co-operative
societies along with the co-operative societies complaining
the infringement of fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(c)
of the Constitution of India is maintainable.
43. Sri M.R. Rajgopal, the learned Senior counsel
appearing for the interveners placed reliance on the
judgment of Akshay N. Patel supra to contend that the
7
(2022) 3 SCC 694
97
restrictions imposed under Section 128-A of the Act of 1959
are reasonable and they pass the four-pronged approach laid
down in the case of K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India8.
The four tests evolved are as under:
"319. This discussion brings out that the following four
subcomponents of proportionality need to be
satisfied:
319.1 A measure restricting a right must have a
legitimate goal (legitimate goal stage).
319.2 It must be a suitable means of furthering this
goal (suitability or rational connection stage).
319.3 There must not be any less restrictive but
equally effective alternative (necessity stage).
319.4 The measure must not have a disproportionate
impact on the right holder (balancing stage)."
44. After having considered the impugned provision
in the backdrop of the aforementioned tests, this Court is of
the view that there are no justifiable reasons to hold that the
provision is less restrictive and without any alternative. And
the impugned provision also does not seem to achieve the
object of the amendment. On the other hand, the provision
that authorises the Registrar to confer the power of
8
(2017) 10 SCC 1
98
recruitment, transfer, and disciplinary action on the Federal
Society, taking away such power from the co-operative
society runs directly contrary to Article 43-B of the
Constitution. Section 128-A confers power on the Registrar
over the matters specified therein. Once such power is
exercised by the Registrar, then the co-operative society
loses its power over the matter of recruitment, transfer, and
disciplinary action concerning its employees. Thus, Section
128-A cannot be construed as a Regulation. On the other
hand, it is a total restriction amounting to prohibition on
three matters specified in it and these three matters are
essential and fundamental to the functioning of the Society.
This being the position, the impugned provision which takes
away the essential and fundamental aspects of the
management cannot be said to be proportional, reasonable,
rationale. Here again at the cost of repetition this Court
would quote what is held in Kasthurilal supra.
'' Any action taken by the Government to give
effect to anyone or more of the directive principles
would ordinarily, subject to any constitutional or legal
inhibitions or other overriding considerations, qualify
for being regarded as reasonable, while an action that
is inconsistent with or runs counter to a directive
99
principle would prima facie incur the reproach of
being unreasonable."
Thus, this Court is of the view that the action contemplated
in Section 128-A of the Act of 1959 is inconsistent and runs
contrary to the mandate of Article 43-B of the Constitution of
India. Thus, it is unreasonable.
45. There is yet another reason to hold that Section
128-A does not pass the test of reasonableness and
rationality. The Primary co-operative society being an
Independent Body Corporate Entity which is founded on the
principle of voluntary formation agreed upon by a group of
persons has certain objectives to be achieved. The Board of
Directors are chosen in a democratic process to run the
co-operative society and will know the requirements of the
co-operative society and those persons are best suited to
judge as to who is suitable to be recruited as the employee
of a co-operative society. However, this power of recruitment
is sought to be conferred on a Federal Society which is a
different entity altogether. No doubt, the Primary
co-operative society may be a member of a Federal
co-operative society and that by itself does not give any
100
control over the administration of a Primary co-operative
society. Thus, the whole idea of conferring the power to
recruit an employee of a co-operative society on an entirely
different Society (Federal Society) undermining the power to
recruit the suitable person to meet the requirement of a
co-operative society does not gel with philosophy of Article
43-B. This is more so, as the nature of the business of the
Federal Society and the nature of the business of the
affiliated Primary Society may be entirely different and it is
quite possible that the Federal Society may not be in a
position to judge the requirement of a Primary Society.
46. Likewise, in a situation where a Primary
co-operative society has more than one branch, then also a
decision to transfer the employee of a Primary co-operative
society from one branch to another branch is a decision to be
taken by the co-operative society in which, such employee is
sought to be transferred. Which of its employee is to be
transferred, when and to which branch, are the decisions
that falls within the domain of the master and that Society
will be in the best position to take appropriate action by
assessing the performance of its employee. Federal Society
101
will not have requisite information in this behalf and
conferring such power to the Federal Society on the face of it
is unreasonable. Such power may turn out to be a counter-
productive as well.
47. Section 128-A on its plain reading would also
suggest that the Registrar is competent to frame Regulations
transferring an employee of a co-operative society from one
co-operative society to another co-operative society. In such
an event, it amounts to changing the master of an employee
who is transferred from one co-operative society to another.
Such transfer would be absolutely illogical given the fact that
different co-operative societies may have different types of
business and work culture. Such a wide power violates the
protection of autonomous functioning and democratic control
which is enjoined in Article 43-B of the Constitution of India
and sought to be achieved through Article 19(1)(c). Viewed
from this angle, the impugned provision cannot be said to be
a reasonable restriction on the fundamental right conferred
under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India.
102
48. This Court has referred to the judgments cited by
the respondent-State in the case of State of Andhra
Pradesh vs. McDowell and Company9. The principle laid
down in the said judgment is noted. The Hon'ble Apex Court
has held that the constitutional validity of a provision can be
struck down only on two grounds namely; lack of legislative
competence or violation of any of the fundamental rights
under Part III of the Constitution of India. This Court is of
the view that the challenge to the validity of Section 128-A
falls under the second category. Reliance is also placed by
the State on the judgment of Daman Singh vs. the State
of Punjab10. The said judgment is rendered before the 97th
Amendment of the Constitution. Hence, cannot be made
applicable to the present case. The judgment of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Arup Bhuyan vs. the State of Assam11 has
no application to the questions involved in the present case.
In the case of H.S. Mohan Reddy vs. the State of
Karnataka,12 the Division Bench of this Court was dealing
with a question as to whether the right to vote in a
co-operative society is a fundamental right and whether
9
(1996) 3 SCC 709
10
(1985) 2 SCC 670
11
(2023) 8 SCC 745
12
W.P. No.2710/2020
103
Section 128-A of Act of 1959 is violative of Article 19(1)(c).
The principle laid down in the said judgment has no
application to the case on hand.
49. The interveners have relied upon the judgment of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of the State of Uttar
Pradesh vs. Deoman Upadhya13. Said judgment does not
deal with the question of violation of fundamental rights
guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India
and is of no assistance to the interveners. The judgment in
M/s. Laxmi Khandsari and Others vs. State of U.P and
Others,14 relied on by the respondents does support the
contention of the petitioners. In the said judgment the
Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the onus of proving that
the restrictions are reasonable is on the State. The Hon'ble
Apex Court has held that if the restrictions imposed are in
furtherance of Directive Principles then, the restrictions
would be manifestly reasonable. Converse if it is, if the
restrictions imposed run contrary to Directive Principles, then
such restrictions are unreasonable. In the instant case, this
13
(1960) SCC OnLIne SC 8
14
(1981) 2 SCC 600
104
Court has noticed and held that the restrictions are in conflict
with the Directive Principles.
50. The learned Advocate General appearing for the
respondent- State stressed on the judgment of the Division
Bench of Madras High Court in C. Manoharan supra. In the
said case, the constitutional validity of Section 75(3) of the
Tamil Nadu Co-Operative Societies Act was under challenge.
Section 75(3) of the said Act provided for constitution of
Common Cadre Committee. It is urged that the though
language employed in the said provision differed from the
language employed in Section 128-A of Act of 1959, in
substance the provision is paramateria with Section 128-A of
Act of 1959. Thus, learned Advocate General would contend
that the said judgment has persuasive value and it is held
that Article 43-B of Constitution of India cannot be applied to
strike down Section 75(3) of the Tamil Nadu
Co-operative Societies Act.
51. This Court has considered the said judgment.
The Division Bench of Madras High Court has held that
Directive Principles of the State Policy are not justifiable and
105
the Court would not normally issue directions for
implementation except in cases relating to environmental
issues and other issues of public importance. The Court also
held that the autonomy recognised under Article 43-B does
not extend to enable the co-operative society to take law
unto themselves and frame their own policy for recruitment,
transfer and to regulate their business as per their whims
and fancies.
52. The judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court on
Directive Principles of the State Policy referred to by this
Court are not brought to the notice of the Madras High
Court. With due respect, this Court is not persuaded to follow
the said judgment.
53. The further reliance on the full Bench judgment of
Madras High Court in Mrs.S. Bagavathy vs. State of Tamil
Nadu15 is also not helpful to the respondent-State. In the
said judgment, the Madras High Court was dealing with the
question of constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu
Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial
15
2007 (2) CTC 207
106
Establishments) Act, 1997. Suffice it to say that the
questions involved in the said case were entirely different
and the petitioners in those case did not have the benefit of
the amended Article 19(1)(c) and 43-B of Constitution of
India.
54. Learned Senior counsel Sri Satyanarayana Rao,
appearing for the intervening respondent urged before this
Court that the petitioners cannot claim the benefit of
amended Article 19(1)(c) and 43-B of Constitution of India.
Learned Senior counsel placed reliance on the judgment of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs.
Rajendra N. Shah16 and urged that the 97th amendment of
Constitution of India is declared unconstitutional and the
petitioners cannot claim fundamental right to form a
co-operative society. The said contention cannot be
accepted. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held that part IX-B of
Constitution of India introduced in 97th amendment is
unconstitutional in so far as the State Co-operative Societies
Act. The said Chapter is held to be valid and applicable to
Multi State Co-operative Societies Act. The amendment to
16
2021 SCC OnLine SC 474
107
Article 19(1)(c) and introduction of Article 43-B of
Constitution was never under challenge in the said
proceeding and those amendments are intact.
55. Before concluding, it is necessary to refer to
State of Madras vs. V.G. Row17. The Apex Court has held
as under:
"It is important in this context to bear in mind that
the test of reasonableness, wherever prescribed,
should be applied to each individual statute
impugned, and no abstract standard, or general
pattern, of reasonableness can be laid down as
applicable to all cases. The nature of the right
alleged to have been infringed, the underlying
purpose of the evil sought to be remedied thereby,
the disproportion of the imposition, the prevailing
conditions at the time, should all enter into the
judicial verdict. In evaluating such elusive factors
and forming their own conception of what is
reasonable, in all the circumstances of a given
case, it is inevitable that the social philosophy and
the scale of values of the judges participating in
the decision should play an important part."
17
AIR 1952 SC 196
108
56. This Court has also kept in mind the principle laid
down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of V.G. Row,
supra and has considered the challenge in the context of 97th
amendment to the Constitution of India and in the context of
amendment by Act No.27/2023 to the Karnataka
Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.
57. Before concluding, this Court would like to place
its appreciation for the assistance rendered by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, learned Advocate General for the
State, learned Government Advocate and the learned Senior
counsel for the interveners.
58. For the aforementioned reasons, this Court
concludes as under:
a. The right to form a co-operative society which is a
fundamental right under Article 19(1)(c) of Constitution
of India, within its fold includes right to recruit, transfer
the employees of a co-operative society and to initiate
disciplinary action against its employees.
b. The State is competent to impose reasonable
restrictions on the fundamental right to form a
109
co-operative society and even on the matters relating
recruitment, transfer, and disciplinary action against
the employees of a co-operative society. However, the
State cannot completely prohibit or take away the right
of a co-operative society to recruit, transfer, and to
initiate disciplinary action on its employees.
c. Section 128-A of the Act of 1959 which empowers
Registrar to completely take away the right of a
co-operative society to recruit, transfer or hold
disciplinary enquiry against its employees is ultra vires
the Constitution of India.
59. Hence, the following;
ORDER
a. Writ Petitions are allowed.
b. Section 128-A of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 introduced by Act No.27 of 2023 is ultra vires the Constitution of India and struck down.
c. No order as to costs.
Sd/-
(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE BRN/CHS/GVP