Karnataka High Court
Dr Veerendra V Tegginmani vs The District Registrer on 26 May, 2022
Author: R.Devdas
Bench: R.Devdas
-1-
WP No. 101894 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MAY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 101894 OF 2022 (GM-KSR)
BETWEEN:
DR VEERENDRA V TEGGINMANI
AGE.72 YEARS, OCC.DOCTOR
R.O VIR VILLA, NEAR KESHWAPUR CIRCLE,
HUBBALLI-580 023.
- PETITIONER
(BY SRI. V M SHEELVANT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DISTRICT REGISTRER OF SOCIETIES,
OFFICE OF REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIEITES AND REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES,
BELAGAVI-590001.
2. SHRI MAHANTAPPA G.PATTANSHETTAR,
AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS, R/O ILAKAL-587125,
DIST.BAGALKOT.
3. THE KITTUR RANI CHENNAMMA MEMORIAL
VINAYAKA
COMMITTEE, KITTUR, DIST BELAGAVI-591 115,
BV REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
Digitally signed by
VINAYAKA B V MAHANTESH S. KOUJALAGI,
Location: Dharwad
Date: 2022.05.28
11:32:11 +0530 AGE: MAJOR, R/O KITTUR.
- RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHIVAPRABHU S. HIREMATH, AGA FOR R1)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT
IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE
WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION AND QUASH THE ORDER BEARING
NO.DRL/SOR/INQUIRY/03/2022-23 DATED 13/05/2022 PASSED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C & ETC.
-2-
WP No. 101894 of 2022
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned Addl. Government Advocate takes notice for respondent No.1. Notice to the other two respondents is not necessary for the following reasons.
2. The petitioner claims to be a member of the respondent No.3-Society which is registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. The petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 13.05.2022 at Annexure-C issued by the respondent No.1- District Registrar of Co-operative Societies.
3. On perusal of the impugned order at Annexure-C, it is clear that the Registrar has appointed an Enquiry Officer to go into the affairs of the respondent No.3-Society by virtue of the power conferred under Section 25 of the Act. Therefore, when a question was posed to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to how the petitioner, even if he is a member of the Society, is aggrieved of the impugned order and answer as to how he could challenge the impugned order and what is his locus-standi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the guise of the impugned order -3- WP No. 101894 of 2022 dated 13.05.2022, the respondent-Registrar is seeking to hold an enquiry against the petitioner, since a complaint has been made making allegations against the petitioner and it is by virtue of the said complaint that the impugned order has been issued.
4. It does not satisfy the requirement of law. It is clear from the impugned order that the respondent No.1-Registrar has appointed an Enquiry Officer to go into the affairs of the respondent No.3- Society. If at all anybody is aggrieved, it should be the respondent No.3-Society. It is also clear that the petitioner has no locus-standi, as a member of the Society to call in question the impugned order.
5. The apprehension of the petitioner that the enquiry is sought to be held against him by virtue of the impugned order is also not supported by the contents of the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1-Registrar. Needless to observe that if there is any other notice issued to the petitioner personally as a member of the society, only then he would get locus standi to question such a notice.
6. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is satisfied that the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the impugned order -4- WP No. 101894 of 2022 dated 13.05.2022 at Annexure-C issued by the respondent No.1- District Registrar of Cooperative Societies.
Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed.
SD JUDGE BVV