Karnataka High Court
Nagaraju vs State Of Karnataka on 7 March, 2025
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:9977
WP No. 5809 of 2025
R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 5809 OF 2025 (CS-EL/M)
BETWEEN:
1) NAGARAJU
S/O. KULLANKEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 53
2) MARISIDDEGOWDA
S/O. CHANNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 81
3) THIMMAPPA
S/O. THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
DODDAKURUBARAHALLI
RASTHEJAKKASANDRA POST
HEROHALLI HOBLI & TALUK
RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT
MEMBERSHIP NO. 77
Digitally signed
by SHWETHA 4) NANJAPPA
RAGHAVENDRA
S/O. MARIGWODA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
KARNATAKA MEMBERSHIP NO. 65
5) CHANNEGOWDA
S/O. SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 84
6) THIMMAPPA
S/O. LATE CHIKKATHIMMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 149
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:9977
WP No. 5809 of 2025
7) MARIYAPPA
S/O. MARIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 74
8) SHIVAMADAIAH
S/O. CHANNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 64
DODDAKURUBARAHALLI
RASTHEJAKKASANDRA POST
HEROHALLI HOBLI & TALUK
RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT
9) CHANNEGOWDA
S/O. CHANNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 70
10) GEETHA
W/O TAGADAPPA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
MEMEBRHSIP9 NO. 71
11) ANKEGOWDA
S/O. SIDDAIAH
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 48
12) KRISHNEGOWDA
S/O. HUCHEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 101
13) PARVATHAMMA
W/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 83
14) DEVAMMA
W/O DANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 153
15) THIMMEGOWDA
S/O. HUCHEGOWDA
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:9977
WP No. 5809 of 2025
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 90
16) JAYAMMA.
W/O. MOTEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 56
17) VENKATESH
S/O. THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 127
18) ALAMELAMMA
W/O KULLEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 108
19) PUTTASWAMY
S/O. SIDDALAH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 47
20) PUTTAMADALAH
S/O. ANKEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 145
21) MARIYAPPA
S/O. SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 138
22) DHANANJAYA
S/O. MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 80
23) THIMMAPPA
S/O. THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 146
24) K. M. SHIVANNA
S/O. MARIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:9977
WP No. 5809 of 2025
MEMBERSHIP NO. 67
25) GOWRAMMA
W/O KRISHNAPPA
S/O. SIDDAIAH
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 125
26) THIMMAPPA
S/O. THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 57
27) CHANNEGOWDA
S/O. THAGADEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 94
28) VENKATAPPA @ CHIKKONU
S/O. VENKATAIAH
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS M
EMBERSHIP NO. 148
29) VENKATESH
S/O. GOVINDAIAH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 130
30) NAGAMMA
W/O HUCHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO.132
31) GOVINDAIAH
S/O. THIMMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 106
32) PUTTEGOWDA
S/O. THAGADEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 66
33) MADEGOWDA
S/O. SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:9977
WP No. 5809 of 2025
MEMBERSHIP NO. 60
34) MADEGOWDA
S/O. NANJEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 42
35) SHIVAKUMAR
S/O. SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 154
36) BASAVARAJU
S/O. MARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO.73
37) KEMPAMMA
W/O. RAGHUVAIAH
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 54
38) SAVITHRAMMA
W/O. THIMMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 136
39) SHIVALINGAMMA
W/O. KENCHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 82
40) CHIKKATHAYAMMA
W/O ANKEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 151
41) HONNAMMA
W/O VEERABHADRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 155
42) ALAMELAMMA
W/O HUCHEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 95
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:9977
WP No. 5809 of 2025
43) CHIKKALINGAIAH
S/O. BORAIAH
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 134
44) CHANNEGOWDA
S/O. KULLANKEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 50
45) MADEGOWDA
S/O. MADAGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 59
46) MAHADEV
S/O. SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 139
47) MADAPPA
S/O. SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 85
48) CHANNEGOWDA
S/O. THAGADEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 51
49) SOMARAJU
S/O. KEMPEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 12
50) NAGARAJU
S/O. MARIGWODA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 62
51) SHIVAMADHU
S/O. MARIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 86
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:9977
WP No. 5809 of 2025
52) SIDDARAJU
S/O. KULLANKEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 76
53) MARIGOWDA
S/O. SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
MEMBERSHIP NO. 141
ALL ARE MEMBERS OF
CHIKKAKURUBARAHALLI MILK PRODUCERS
CO-OP COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,
HAROHALLI HOBLI, HAROHALLI TALUK
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. MAHESH KIRAN SHETTY., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. T DADAKHALANDAR.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1) STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT
6TH FLOOR, M.S. BUILDING,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU -560001
2) DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, 1ST FLOOR,
ZILLA PANCHAYATH OFFICE
RAMANAGARA
3) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
RAMANAGARA SUB DIVISION
RAMANAGARA
4) RETURNING OFFICER,
CHIKKAKURUBARAHALLI MILK PRODUCERS
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD HAROHALLI HOBLI,
HAROHALLI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC:9977
WP No. 5809 of 2025
5) SECRETARY,
CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY
2ND FLOOR, TTMC BUILDING, SHANTHINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560027
(REGISTERED UNDER THE KCS ACT 1959)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL., SR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. H.N. BASAVARAJU., ADVOCATE FOR C/R4;
SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK., AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. T.L. KIRAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO INCLUDE THE NAMES OF THE
PETITIONERS IN THE ELIGIBLE VOTERS LIST IN ADDITION TO 60
ELIGIBLE VOTERS AS APPROVED BY THE R-2 AUTHORITY VIDE
ANNX-L AND PERMISSION FOR THE PETITIONERS TO CONTEST AND
VOTE IN THE ELECTION SCHEDULED ON AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
a. Direct the respondent authorities to include the names of the petitioners in the eligible voters list in addition to 60 eligible voters as approved by the 2nd Respondent authority vide Annexure-L and permission for the petitioners to contest and vote in the election scheduled on b. Pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.-9-
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025
2. Chikkakurubarahalli Milk Producers Cooperative Cooperative Society Ltd., a Milk Producers Cooperative Society (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the "Cooperative Society ") has been established for carrying out its business in Chikka Kurubarahalli, Dodd Kurubarahalli, Gaddanayakanahalli and Bannikoppe and had enrolled members from each of the above villages. Subsequently, on 28.08.1998 an amendment was carried out, by virtue of which the area of operation of the Cooperative Society was restricted to Chikkakurubarahalli only. However, the membership continued as is i.e., members were from Chikka Kurubarahalli, Dodd Kurubarahalli, Gaddanayakanahalli and Bannikoppe, and was reflected in the Balance sheet and elections were held in pursuance thereto post 1998 till the year 2023.
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025
3. In the year 2023 the names of the petitioners who are residents of Dodd Kurubarahalli was deleted from the list of eligible members or in other words a list of eligible voters was published without the names of the petitioners being included in the said list. It is challenging the same, the petitioners are before this Court contending that they continue to be members of the Cooperative Society and as such their names arre rrequirred to be included in the eligible voters list in addition to the list approved by respondent No.2.
4. The submission of Sri.Mahesh Kiran Shetty, learned counsel for the petitioners is that 4.1. Though by amendment in the year 1998, the operation of the activities of the Cooperative Society were restricted to Chikka Kurubarahalli, not only where the petitioners continued as members of the Cooperative Society, but also the petitioners were supplying milk to the
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 Cooperative Society which has been accepted by the Cooperative Society.
4.2. The petitioners have participated in all the elections post 1998 until now and as such the deletion of their names could not have occurred without even as much as issuing notices to them.
4.3. His submission is that there cannot be a removal of the petitioners' names without following the principles of natural justice. He also relies on Section 14 of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 ['Act of 1959' for short] to contend that if at all there was any division of the co-operative Societies, the procedure under Section 14 would have to be followed.
5. Mr. M.R. Rajagopal, learned Senior counsel appearing for the Cooperative Soceity would submit that:
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 5.1. Post the amendment on 28.08.1998, the area of operation of the Cooperative Society being restricted to Chikka Kurubarahalli, any person who is not a resident of Chikka Kurubarahalli was automatically disqualified from being a member of Cooperative Society on account of having incurred ineligibility for being a member in terms of clause (a) of subsection (1) of Section 16 of the Act of 1959 which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
16. Persons who may become members.- (1) Subject to the provisions of section 17, no person shall be admitted as a member of a co- operative society except the following, namely:--
(a) an individual who needs the services of such co-
operative society [and is residing in the area of the operation of the society] and is competent to enter into contract under the Contract Act, 1872 (a-1) a depositor
(b) any other co-operative society;
(c) the state Government or the Central Government;
(d) the Life Insurance Corporation of India, State Warehousing Corporation and such other institutions as may be approved by the State Government;
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025
(e) a firm, a company or any other body corporate constituted under any law for the time being in force including a society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (Karnataka Act 17 of 1960);
(f) a Market *board* established under the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 (Karnataka Act 27 of 1966);
(g) a local authority.
Explanation.--For the purpose of this clause, local authority means, a Municipal Corporation, Municipal Council, Town Panchayat, Zilla Panchayat, Taluk Panchayat or Grama Panchayat constituted under any law for the time being in force.
(2) No co-operative society shall, without sufficient cause, refuse admission to membership to any person duly qualified therefor under the provisions of this Act, rules and bye-laws (3) Any person seeking admission as a member of any co-operative society shall make an application in writing for admission as a member of such society. (4) Every co-operative society shall within [two months] from the date on which application for admission was delivered to such society either admit or refuse to admit any such person as a member, and shall send a written communication of such admission or refusal to the applicant before the said period. If no communication of admission as a member is received by the applicant before the expiry of the said period, his application for admission shall be deemed to have been accepted by the co-operative society on the last day of the said period for purposes of section 105A.
[(5)XXX (6)XXX
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 (7)XXX] 1 [(8) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section and section 17, the State Government shall be deemed to have been admitted as a member of a co-operative society on the day it subscribes to the share capital of such co-operative Society.] 5.2. His submission is that it is only an individual who avails the service of the Cooperative soceity and such person is residing in the area of operation of the Cooperative Society who is competent to enter into contact under the Contract Act, 1872 who could be a member of the Cooperative Society.
5.3. Now that Dodda Kurubarahalli has been excluded from the area of operation of the Cooperative Society, a person residing in Dodda Kurubarahalli cannot be a member of the Cooperative Society. In this regard, he relies upon Subclause (e) of Subsection (1) of Section 17 to contend that no person shall be eligible for admission as a member of the Cooperative
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 Society if he is not eligible for membership under Section 16. Section 17 is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
17. Disqualification for membership.- (1) No person shall be eligible for admission as a member of a co-operative society, if he,--
(a) has applied to be adjudicated an insolvent or is an undischarged insolvent; or
(b) has been sentenced for any offence, other than an offence of a political character or an offence not involving moral turpitude, such sentence not having been reversed or the offence pardoned and a period of five years has not elapsed from date of expiry of the sentence.
(c) carries on business of the kind carried on by such co-operative society;
(d) is already a member of a co-operative society carrying on business of the same kind as itself;]
(e) is not eligible for membership under section 16;
(f) is a paid employee of the society or of its financing bank; or (2) If a member becomes subject to any of the disqualifications specified in sub-section, he shall be deemed to have ceased to be a member from the date when the disqualification was incurred.
(2A) If a member fails to fulfil his obligations as a member under the Act, rules or bye-laws, for a continuous period of three years, he shall, on the expiry of such period, cease to be a member.
(3) If any question arises as to whether a member is deemed to have ceased or has ceased to be a member under sub-section (2) or (2A), the Registrar may either suo-motu or on a report made to him and after
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 giving an opportunity to the person concerned of being heard, decide the question.
5.4. This he submits is an automatic disqualification which occurs after the amendment on 28.08.1998 since post that date, the person who was not residing within the jurisdiction of Chikka Kurubarahalli became ineligible to become a member in terms of clause (a) of subsection (1) of Section 16 and as such stood disqualified from membership in terms of Subclause (e) of Subsection (1) of Section 17. 5.5. He also relies upon Section 18A to contend that a person shall cease to be a member of the Cooperative Society in terms of Clause (iii) of Sub Clause (A) of Section 18A when he incurs a disqualification and cessation. This he relates to and reads with Clause (e) of Subsection (1) of Section 17 and Clause (a) of Subsection (1) of Section 16 to contend that firstly there is no
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 eligibility of membership on part of the petitioners to continue as members of the cooperative soceity post the amendment on 28.08.1998 in view of Clause (e) of Subsection (1) of Section 17, they became disqualified and they ceased to be members in terms of Clause
(iii) of Clause (a) of Section 18A. Section 18A is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
18A. Cessation of membership.- A person shall cease to be a member of a co-operative society,-
(a) in the case of an individual, on his or her,-
(i) death;
(ii) resignation;
[(iii) disqualification and cessation]
(iv) transfer of whole of his or her share or interest in the co-operative society to another member;
(b) in the case of a firm, company, co-operative society or corporate body,-
(i) on dissolution of the firm or a corporate body;
(ii) on winding up of a company or a co-operative society.
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 5.6. In this regard, he relies upon the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 5.01.2004 in K.B. Lingaraju vs. The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies1, more particularly paragraph 6 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
6. Section 17(2) of the Act states that if a member incures any of the disqualifications specified in sub-section (1), he shall be deemed to have ceased to be a member from the date when the disqualification was incurred. This ceasure of membership will apply in respect of the disqualifications mentioned in Clauses (a),
(b) and (c) of Section 17(1) but the same will not apply to the disqualification mentioned in Clause (d). The reason is, if a person is member of a co-operative society, he is not eligible to become member of another society carrying on the same business. If he is ineligible to become member of another society, his membership in the former society will not be ceased as ceasure of membership will come into force only if the member of the society becomes member of another society. In view of the ineligibility to become member of a society by virtue of the membership in other society, a person cannot become member of two or more co-operative societies carrying on same business. Despite such ineligibility, if a person is admitted into membership by another society, such membership is invalid and contrary to Clause (d) of Section 17(1) of the Act. In other words, if a member of a society is admitted as member of another society carrying on same business, the admission in the other society cannot be 1 WP No. 35194/2003
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 recognized as a valid membership. Therefore, if the petitioner was admitted as member in the 3rd respondent society contrary to Section 17(1)(d), it was the mistake of 3rd respondent society. On account of that, the membership of the petitioner in the 2nd respondent society will not be ceased as the petitioner cannot be recognised as member of 3rd respondent society. The first respondent has not considered these aspects of the matter while passing the impugned order. The order is passed without application of mind to the provisions of the Act. Hence, the same cannot be sustained. 5.7. By relying on Lingaraju's case, he submits that once a disqualification occurs, it results in automatic ineligibility and therefore the removal of the names of the petitioners from the list of eligible voters is proper and correct. 5.8. The said judgment in Lingaraju's case had been taken up on appeal The Tumkur Grain Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd., vs. K.B. Lingaraju and others2, he relies on the judgement of the Division bench more 2 ILR 2005 Karnataka 5673
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 particularly paragraph 6 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
6. A reading of the aforesaid provisions would indicate that, a person is ineligible for admission as a member of a co-operative society, if he has incurred any disqualification as envisaged under clauses (a) to
(d) of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Act. For our purpose, clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Sec. 17 of the Act is relevant. It says, that, if a person is already a member of a co-operative society carrying on business of the same kind as itself; then that person is ineligible for admission as a member of a co-operative society.
Sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Act states that, if a member is subjected to the disqualifications specified in clause (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Act, he shall be deemed to have ceased to be a member from the date when the disqualification has incurred. The legislature knowingly has used the expression "deemed" to deem that, a person who has acquired the disqualifications, which are contemplated under clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Act, is ineligible to be a member of the other society. This is all that we see in Section 17 of the Act.
5.9. By relying on the decision of the learned Division Bench of this Court, he again submits that there are deeming provisions under section 17 as regards to disqualification and that
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 deeming provision kicked in subsequent to the amendment on 28.08.1998.
5.10. He also relies upon a decision of this Court as regards to the very same Cooperative Society in W.P. No. 161/2025, dated 14.02.2025 to contend that this Court has directed the election process to be continued as per the amended By-laws and therefore he submits that since the election is to be as per the amended By-laws, as amended on 28.08.1998, the petitioners cannot be said to be members, let alone eligible members to vote at the election to be carried out.
6. Heard Sri.Mahesh Kiran Shetty, learned counsel for Sri.T.Dedakhalendar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, Senior counsel for Sri.H.N.Basavaraju, learned counsel for respondent No.4, Sri.Yogesh D.Naik, learned counsel for
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 respondents No.1 to 3 and Sri.T.L.Kiran Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.5. Perused papers.
7. The points that would arise for consideration are:
i. Whether post the amendment to the byelaws, the petitioners who were earlier members of the cooperative society can be said to be persons who are not eligible to become members of the Cooperative Society and thus deemed to have been disqualified in terms of Section 17 ceasing to be members of the cooperative society under Section 18A of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959? ii. Whether the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.161/2025 dated 14.02.2025 can be pressed into service by the petitioners to contend that the petitioners are ineligible to participate in the elections? iii. What order?
8. I answer the above points as under:
9. ANSWER TO POINT NO.1: Whether post the amendment to the byelaws, the petitioners who were earlier members of the cooperative society can be said to be persons who are not eligible to become members of the Cooperative Society and thus deemed to have been disqualified in terms of Section 17 ceasing to be
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 members of the cooperative society under Section 18A of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959?
9.1. The interconnection and interrelation between Sections 16, 17 and 18 as sought to be made by Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, learned Senior counsel have been placed hereinabove.
9.2. What is required to be referred to is the amendment which has occurred to clause (a) of Subsection (1) of Section 16 on 11.02.2013. It is by virtue of the said amendment, that the words 'and is residing in the area of the operation of the Cooperative Society' were included with effect from 11.02.2013. These words were not in existence prior to that date. The said provision thus read as under till 2013:
16. Persons who may become members.- (1) Subject to the provisions of section 17, no person shall be admitted as a member of a co- operative society except the following, namely:--
- 24 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025
(a) an individual who needs the services of such co-
operative society and is competent to enter into contract under the Contract Act, 1872 9.3. Admittedly, the cooperative soceity has been established long ago and amendment was carried out on 28.08.1998. Admittedly, the petitioners were members of respondent No.4- Cooperative Society prior to and as on 28.08.1998 and there was no restriction on a person who is not residing in the area to be member of the Cooperative Society in terms of clause (a) of Subsection (1) of Section 16, which restriction came to be included only on 11.02.2013.
9.4. Thus, insofar as the present case is concerned, the date on which the petitioners became members of Cooperative Socielty, there was no qualification of the petitioners to be members residing in the area of operation of the
- 25 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 Cooperative Society. Even post the amendment in the year 1998 till the year 2013, the requirement was not present due to the amendment to the Act having come into force only on 11.02.2013. Thus, it cannot be contended that from the date of the amendment to the byelaws on 28.08.1998, the petitioners became ineligible and or became disqualified and or ceased to be members of the Cooperative Society post the amendment to the bye laws dated 28.08.1998 since the eligibility criteria under clause (a) of subsection (1) of section 16 did not require it to be so, thereby the operation of clause (e) of subsection (1) of Section 17 disqualifying the petitioners would not have occurred on 28.08.1998 bringing into force the cessation under sub-clause (iii) of clause (a) of Section 18A.
- 26 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 9.5. If at all, it can only be contended by the Cooperative Society that this ineligibility came into force on 11.02.2013. The amendment which is brought about to Section 16 is by way of insertion, not by way of substitution. Therefore, the inserted provision would only be prospective in nature and not retrospective and as such, the requirement as regards eligibility could not be made retrospective in so far as the Cooperative Society is concerned under clause
(a) of subsection (1) of section 16, thereby the operation of clause (e) of subsection (1) of Section 17 disqualifying the petitioners bringing into force the cessation under sub-clause (iii) of clause (a) of Section 18A can not be said to have occurred retrospectively. 9.6. In that view of the matter, I answer point No.1 by holding that the petitioners who have been members of the Cooperative Society prior to
- 27 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 the amendment, having been members of the Cooperative Society on the date of the amendment to the byelaws and continuing to be members of the Cooperative Society thereafter when there was no ineligibility in terms of clause (a) of Subsection (1) of Section 16, they will continue to be members even as on today and the disqualification under Section 17 and cessation of membership under Section 18A would not be applicable in so far as the petitioners are concerned.
10. ANSWER TO POINT NO.2: Whether the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.161/2025 dated 14.02.2025 can be pressed into service by the petitioners to contend that the petitioners are ineligible to participate in the elections?
10.1. The submission of Shi M R Rajagopal learned Senior Counsel is that in view of the order which has been passed in W.P. No.161/2025, the elections are to be held as per the amended
- 28 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 Bylaws. On enquiry as to who the petitioners were in the said petition, it is submitted that those are the persons who are residing in Chikka Kurubarahalli, who are the eligible members post the amendment to the byelaws on 28.08.1998.
10.2. If that be so, the so-called eligible members had not made the so-called ineligible members like the petitioners a party to the said proceedings and the order passed is behind the back of the petitioners who are not parties therein.
10.3. In view of my answer to point No.1 the petitioners continuing to be members of the cooperative society the amendment to the bye laws not having any detrimental effect in so far as the membership of the petitioners is concerned the said order would not have any
- 29 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 bearing in the present matter. The aspect of membership not being decided in that matter. 10.4. That apart the said decision could not be said to have decided the rights of the petitioners who were not parties to the said proceedings. The cooperative Society or the so called eligible members cannot press the said judgement into service to contend that the petitioners herein are disqualified members whose membership has ceased. Hence, the said order in my considered opinion cannot be held to be applicable to the petitioners, though it is contended that the petitioners had filed an intervening application, the said intervening application was held not to survive in view of disposal of the petition.
10.5. Be that as it may, as held Supra, even as per the amended Bylaws, the petitioners would continue to be members and cannot be said to
- 30 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 be ineligible, disqualified or ceased to be members of Cooperative Society. Hence, even on that ground, the said order dated 14.02.2025 insofar as the membership of the petitioners is concerned, would not be applicable.
10.6. ANSWER TO POINT NO.3: What Order?
In view of my answers to Points No.1 and 2, I pass the following:
ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed.
ii. A mandamus is issued directing Respondent No.4 to include the names of the petitioners in the eligible voters list subject to Clause (2-A) of Rule 13D of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Rules, 1960 and Section 20 (A-iv) and (A-v) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies
- 31 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9977 WP No. 5809 of 2025 Act, 1959, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
iii. Needless to say, until then elections cannot be held and the Administrator shall continue to discharge his duties.
SD/-
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE LN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10