Telangana High Court
Peddolla Chandrashekar vs The State Of Telangana on 9 September, 2025
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION No.2954 OF 2025
ORDER:
In this Writ Petition, the petitioners are challenging the Election held on 10.12.2023 for Board of Directors for Respondent No.6 Society allowing proxy votes and in violation of byelaws No.13 and 21 of Respondent No.6 Society and consequently to direct the respondents No.2 to 4 to conduct fresh Elections strictly in accordance with the byelaws of the Society and to pass such other order or orders.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Cooperation, appearing for respondents No.1 to 4 and Mr.L.Arvind Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Society was formed on 09.01.2023. As per the byelaw No.13 adopted by the Society and approved by the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies, proxy votes are not allowed in Elections and byelaw No.21 also provided for Election of Board of Directors at the first instance with staggered terms and the term of the Directors was to be decided by drawl of lots specifying different terms and thereafter, the Election to the Board of Directors is to be conducted before expiry of the term of Board of Directors. It is further submitted that in this case, both the byelaws have been violated.
-2-
4. Respondent No.3 has filed counter affidavit stating that Election has been conducted violating the byelaws. In paragraph No.5 of the counter affidavit, it has been stated as under:-
"(i) The Election Officer has conducted election directly to the officer Bearer posts which is incorrect, as all the Board of Directors have to be elected initially and subsequently the Office bearers are to be elected by the Board of Directors as per the provisions of Byelaw No.21 of the society.
(ii) The Election Officer has failed to declare the staggered terms of the Board of Directors by drawl of lots.
(iii) The Election Officer has allowed (54) Proxy Voters in the said election which is a violation of the Byelaw No.13 of the society.
(iv) The Election Officer has conducted election to 10 Board of Directors as against the (9) Board of Directors on the Board as per the Byelaw No.22 of the society."
Therefore, according to the 3rd respondent, Election has not been held in accordance with the byelaws.
5. Respondent No.6 has filed counter affidavit and the learned counsel for the 6th respondent has drawn attention of this Court to the amendment of byelaw No.21 in the General Body meeting held on 05.11.2023. Therefore, according to him, there is no violation of byelaw No.21. As regards voting by proxy is concerned, he submitted that the petitioners have also participated in the meeting in which it was agreed to conduct voting by proxy and the Election Officer has agreed for the -3- same. Therefore, according to him, the petitioners cannot turn around and challenge the same at this stage.
6. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that byelaw No.13 was not amended by the respondents and byelaw No.13 prescribes that the voting shall be done by the members only and proxy voting shall not be allowed. Such being the case, byelaw No.13 cannot be violated. The Election ought to have been held in accordance with byelaw No.13 i.e., votes shall be cast in person by only the owner/member whose name is the first in the share certificate and not by anybody else.
7. In view thereof, the Election for the Board of Directors conducted on 10.12.2023 is liable to be set aside and respondent No.6 shall re- conduct the Election strictly in accordance with byelaws.
8. Accordingly, the Election conducted on 10.12.2023 is set aside and the Writ Petition is allowed and the Election shall be conducted within a period of one (01) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the term of the present Board of Directors is going to expire in two months, therefore, Elections have to be held again after expiry of two months and therefore, they may be permitted to complete their term and Elections can be held for the next term. This Court is of the opinion that Election held in violation of byelaws cannot be sustained or -4- allowed. Therefore, it is made clear that tenure of the Directors who shall now be elected shall be for a period of three years and further Elections shall be held thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs.
9. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition stand closed.
_____________________________ JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI Date: 09.09.2025.
dv/aks