Karnataka High Court
Narayan vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 April, 2023
Author: R.Devdas
Bench: R.Devdas
-1-
WA No. 100461 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.DEVDAS
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
WRIT APPEAL NO. 100461 OF 2022 (CS-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. NARAYAN
AGED 66 YEARS, S/O KRISHNA NAYAK
R/O BELEKERI, ANKOLA TALUK,
UTTAR KANNADA 581321
2. DAYANANDA
AGE. 65 YEARS, S/O NARAYAN NAYAK
R/O LAXMESHWAR VILLAGE, ANKOLA TALUK,
UTTAR KANNADA 581314
3. NARAYAN
AGED 68 YEARS, S/O RAMA NAYAK
R/O HONNEKARI, ANKOLA TALUK
Digitally
signed by UTTAR KANNADA 581314
BHARATHI
HM
Location:
BHARATHI High Court
HM of Karnataka,
4. ANANDU
Dharwad
Date:
2023.04.15 AGED 50 YEARS, S/O NAGAPPA KAWARI
10:45:39
+0530
R/O TORKE VILLAGE, KUMTA TALUK
UTTAR KANNADA 581344
5. BEERANNA
AGED 78 YEARS, S/O SUBBAYYA NAYAK
R/O HONNEKARI, ANKOLA TALUK
UTTAR KANNADA - 581314
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.VIKRAM HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.GANGADHAR
S HOSAKERI AND SRI.D.M.MALLI, ADVS)
-2-
WA No. 100461 of 2022
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATION AND ENQUIRY OFFICER,
M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE 560001
2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES
AND DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES
SARASWATI SADAN, 2ND FLOOR, HABBUWAD
UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR 581301
3. THE NADAVARA SANGHA (R)
GANDHI NIVAS, ANKOLA
UTTARA KANNADA 581314
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
MR. MANJESHWAR
AGED 42 YEARS,
S/O MANESHWAR NAYAK
R/O BELEKERI, ANKOLA TALUK,
UTTARA KANNADA 581321
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.S.YADRAMI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.NARAYAN V.YAJI,
ADV. FOR C/R3,
SRI.V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1 & R2)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON BLE COURT TO, I. SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 17.08.2022 PASSED IN WP NO.101735/2022
AND, CONSEQUENTLY, II. RESTORE THE ORDER DATED 19.04.2022
PASSED BY THE SECRETARY AND ENQUIRY OFFICER-1ST
RESPONDENT IN CASE NO.NO.SA.E./36/C.S.R./2021.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, R.DEVDAS J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
WA No. 100461 of 2022
JUDGMENT
R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
The appellants are the members of respondent No.3- Nadavara Sangha, which was registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). Respondent No.3-Sangha filed W.P.No.101735/2022 calling in question the Government Order dated 19.04.2022 by virtue of which an administrator was appointed invoking the provisions contained in Section 27-A of the Act. The learned Single Judge noticed the contentions of the petitioners herein who were respondent Nos.3 to 7 before the learned Single Judge that the elections to the society were not conducted in the manner known to law and that the office bearers have been elected in contravention of the bye-laws and the law of the land. More particularly, it was sought to be pointed out that after the term of previous governing council was over, the members have been inducted to the society without there being power vested with it. The entire exercise was -4- WA No. 100461 of 2022 undertaken only to gain an advantage over the members seeking to be elected into the governing council. However, the learned Single Judge has held that whether the election is conducted in the general body or not as contemplated in the bye-law of the society is a question of fact and it cannot be gone into by the court exercising its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
2. Learned senior counsel Sri.Vikram Huilgol appearing for the appellants would submit that in terms of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 27-A of the Act, it is permissible for the State Government to appoint an administrator based on a report made by the Registrar or otherwise, on enquiry, if under such circumstances, the State Government considers it necessary in public interest, it is empowered to appoint an administrator. Learned senior counsel would therefore submit that appointment of an administrator was based on a report submitted by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Society, Karwar and -5- WA No. 100461 of 2022 therefore, the appointment of an administrator is in terms of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 27-A of the Act.
3. On the other hand, learned senior counsel Sri.S.S.Yadrami appearing for contesting respondent No.3 submits that provisions contained in Section 27-A of the Act makes it very clear that, if a society for any reason is unable to hold annual general body meeting or where the term of the office bearers of the governing body has expired and new governing body has not for any reason been constituted, it is permissible to the State Government to appoint an administrator for a period not exceeding six months to manage the affairs of the society and to enable holding of the elections to establish a legitimate governing body to the society.
4. Learned senior counsel would therefore submit that if a report has been submitted by the Deputy Registrar of the Co-operative Society opining that the elections conducted by the previous governing body after the expiry of the term and after inducting members illegally, forms -6- WA No. 100461 of 2022 the basis of such a report being sent to the Government, then the same cannot be the basis on which the administrator can be appointed. On the contrary, it is submitted that if the members who contested the elections are of the opinion that the elections were not conducted in accordance with the bye-laws of the society or the provisions of the acts and rules, then, it is permissible for them to invoke the provisions contained in Section 25 of the act and approach the Registrar to declare that the elections conducted by the previous governing body is not in accordance with the bye-laws. It is also permissible for the Registrar to reject the list of governing counsel members that was submitted consequent to elections held to the society. However, at any rate this cannot be a ground to appoint an administrator to the society.
5. There is a substance in the submission of the learned senior counsel appearing for the contesting respondents. Having regard to the contentions raised at the hands of the appellants herein, it is clear that they are aggrieved of -7- WA No. 100461 of 2022 the induction of new members to the society at the hands of the governing body who's term was already expired. It is contended that the act of inducting members to the society was done with the sole intention of grabbing an advantage over the other members who intended to contest the elections. If that is the grievance, in the considered opinion of this Court, it could be vented before the Registrar under Section 25 of the Act. The appellants had also approached the Registrar invoking various other provisions such as Sections 13, 27 and 27A of the act, but the prayer was to declare the enrolment of the newly inducted members numbering 356 as illegal and void and consequently declare the elections held by the previous governing body as non-est in the eye of law. However, it is also given to understand that the Registrar had in fact considered the grievance of the petitioners and has passed an order dated 12.03.2021 holding that the induction of the 356 members at the hands of the previous governing body and holding of elections were not in accordance with the bye-laws. Nevertheless, the said order was challenged -8- WA No. 100461 of 2022 before the learned single judge in WP No.101382/2021. By order dated 27.07.2021. The learned single judge noticed that the Deputy Registrar had not held an enquiry as contemplated under Section 25 of the Act and consequently, the order passed by the Deputy Registrar deserves to be quashed on that ground alone. In fact the learned single judge, has also opined that the basis of the report submitted by the Deputy Registrar being found on the induction of the new members at the hands of the previous governing body and that the elections were not in accordance with the bye-laws that the some reasons could not constitute the basis for appointment of the Administrator to the society under Section 25A(1)(b) of the Act.
6. Having regard to the opinion rendered by the two learned single judges in both the orders as noticed herein above, the impugned order cannot be faulted. Moreover, the term of the present governing body of the 3rd -9- WA No. 100461 of 2022 respondent-Society will come to an end by the next 11 months.
7. Be that as it may, if the appellants herein insist on challenging the previous elections held on 28.02.2021, they are free to do so by invoking Section 25 of the Act. If such a petition is filed, the Deputy Registrar is required to hold an enquiry as contemplated in the said provisions of act and Rules and pass necessary orders.
8. For the reasons stated above, we proceed to hold that no infirmity can be found in the order dated 17.08.2022 passed by the learned single judge.
Accordingly, writ appeal stands dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE MBS-upto para 3 HMB-Para 4 to end List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17