Sri S Prakash vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 September, 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAN

DATED Tms THE 27'?" DAY OF SEPTEMBER $'3~t  "

BEFORE

THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE 5;';    

WRIT PETITION NOs.25816:2581.vE3/2'Oi.O (C.S'-'TEL./'['/1}" 

BEIE WEEN:

1.

'   Atiand
" = . S/_o.V1a€.e 'Srinivasa Gowda

Sri. S. Prakash
S/0. Seenappa V V
Aged about 534 years"  -- 

R/21. Kondashéttyhallii vi1iage,°7 'V V ' 
Tekal H.r:~b.1i, ii/Iai_iur"Fa1a1_k   
Kolar  '     

S,-er.' "Nl."7¥Té_'Uk8.t;itJ Red dy
SV}'fO.  " V  
Aged about 47V"};ears"i'-.... " 
R/a.».Manigar1a'ha11i  " '
Srinivasapura _Tal_uk., 

Kolar Distrjicfi '

Aged .Veib(3ui?»~'4O years

. h  'R/ 3. -Fiosiir Village
 SL1..111<_L1}iite: Post,

Bémgarpet T aluk

K0131' District ... PETITIONERS

'   D.N. Nanjunda Raddy. Senior Advocate
'  fqr Sri. I-LN. Shashidhara Adv.)



AND:

The State of KE11"1"lE1t'c1kE1
Department of C0~ope1'ation
Rep. by its Secret.a1'y
Multistoried Building

D1". Ambeclkar Veedhi
Bangalore 560 001

The Joint Registrar

Of Co--operat:ive Societies
Pampamahakavi Road
Chamarajpet

Bangaiore W 560 O 18

The Kolar District. C0--0perati"Veb 
Union Ltd., No.54,/:"1...V  * 
District Sahakara Bhiavfaiia 5 . "

II 1661':   .   '  
Kevlar.'  __ .
Rep. by its.ChiE:fVEX_CC-!,1't1f!e Officer

Sri. '3\/teiikatafipet * 

jS/ c...Muni'yap'pVa

 4°2'Xge%d about 5:"iv--},zea'rs
  R/'aj. K_é1veranaha11i
.. " ~V.S.'G'."E{bcvte"Post, Bangarpet Taiuk:
 Kuiguqniéirivct-,

 Stilt." 'i'..S. Umadevi

W/0, S.N. Narasappa
Aged about 30 years

At ._R/a. Yeldur viliage 81 Post
H Srinivasapura Taliik

Kolar District



Sri. HM. Thimmappa

S/0. H. Munlyappa

Aged about 60 years J  b
'Bhavyashree Harsitha Nilaya'  A' ._ 
Keekkote, near Sathayamma Te'mp1§3'e .. 
K0131' City V  

Smt. Shanthamma

W/o. K. Prakash

Aged about 55 years d *  '
R/a. Gattakamade11a}'1a11i__  . "

Bangarpet Taluk

K01arD1strte1;    '
President, the-.Ko1a§r District  .
C0~opera{£ive"j£Lt1i0ri--_Lttlb'  

Sri. K.R;.B'ee'r_appa   «. A A
S,:"d;"Ra1;ie;goWf{ia  

Aged _ah0ut'  'years  .  _
R/Va. Kesar_ag~ei'e village " __
Masti Hob1i,=.Ma1ur 'rank
Kolar D_ist1'ict- A   "E

fxfice Presi.d'e'n't',' the Kt).1a1'JIZ)istrict
gt ""«Cq--_t')perative' U.3f1_i_Q'fl Ltd. .... RESPONDENTS

ti-By«.sr;’. ‘M’;’-«Kesha.va Reddy. AGA, for R4 and R-2
Sri. T13. Mei§”1’aIi’Eesh, Adv. for R-3
Sri.LI_ayaku1n’ar S. Patil, Sr. Advocate, for

fl M/s. Jayaekumar S. Patil 8: Assts, Advs. for R-4 to 8}

‘-i==i=*=i=*

These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226p'”.’a–1p1d
227 of the Constitution of India praying to qt121_s~h”-..the

etc.

noii’fieatioi’1 dt.1 1.8.2010 issued by R-1 vide An11ext.1.re’~.D’ ar§.d”‘« 3

These Writ Petitions having been hear-d”‘and’_~re”sVer’.:ed__

for Orders. this day the Court pronounced’the–«to’l.lowi’ng:V =

0RD”]l:”.R__

In these cases, the petitioiiers-.rh.a\te”ehetllenged the
order at Annexu1’e–D the hit
respondent whereby ifiiere nominated
to the managi_n-5%, Co–operative
Union Ltd., that the election of

respondent’ _’ the Adhyaksha and the

Upadhyaltshla of the Sift’ 1fés§mi’aent as illegal.

petitioners are the me1:11be1’s of the Kolar

A”Distriet~Co;oper,a:tiVe Union Ltd, the 31″‘ respondent herein.

T h€””«tOt21_’.v’I1I,lfi’1b€1′ ol’n1e’n1bers of the inanaging Committee of

V'”t’he 3″‘i*,l.’€S})Ol1d€11l. is twenty~one. Seventeen of them are

l’ eiee_t_efd directly and four are the ex-offieio members. The

t
g

eieetion to the con’1n1it.tee of nianagement of the 3″‘

respondent was held on 29.07.2010. It is Ltonterided.-“that.

after declaration of the results. the Chief Exeeutiy.e”-0i’i§C€i~”..

issued a notice dated 5.8.2010 for election of M

and the Upedyakslm for the first iW<)'*'aIJ.d hell!'

Government of Kariiataka 0 .v1;1(3~f<i1'E:C§"?}:i'\K).1:l2Vv"

No.CEO.106.CNS.2010 dated "1_fJ;os.2o'10__ hats'-V_no_rr'rina'ted
respondent Nos/1 to 6 to the n1ane;g;=,ing"Vz;on1n1itte.e ofithe 3m
respondent. It is further:.th'.at':tt.he–..Joint Registrar

of Cowoperative Societies,'Banga1ore;',11ad. pzissed an exparte

order d3.°i;e"c'i" Of at t.he""'i'r'rst:anCe of one of the

defeated the 3" petitioner from

participatiiigj e'::;::::¢§~':1 of the Adhyaksha and the

se2l1"edu,_}_e(:1vo11 12.08.2010. The other eiected

V':rnenibers–,_were_not aware of the nomination of respondent

restraint order. They have submitted

their noniinatiéons to Contest the election. of the Adhyaksha

tithe tispadliyaksha on 12.08.2010. They came to

._1i_:x1'o\(V' " the nomination of three members only on

12.8.2010. The chairperson acljourned the 1'1v1Vee_t'ir1.g

commenced at 12.30 21.111. because of the

commotion and left the premises along with the pe.tilio11ers.l

Thereal'f;e1'. 13 members of {hell managin_g'7 c7o:1't1miVt'tee

including the 3 nominated _rnen1be'rs'Wand e'x¥ct'ficio

members continued the I'1]6€tiI'l'g.:'€1I1Cl §1;<;-neat
Nos"? and 8 as the Adllyéksha lfipadhjzokshovéfor the
first two and half years.hilt-ll';lllujérlue;§:_:é¢;_;:;.:';§;gdad that the
Government has 3m respondent
at any Point the Government
has not méi'Cle- "tl'1e"h1ar1aging eommittee of
the 3rd 17 elected members. 14

members aV1:e~-.xopposedh'.to'«.l€'5li1a1'atiya Janatha Party and 3

—.A_mem_’oérs:__lAaz’e tl1e’s11__pporters of Bharatiya Janatha Party.

l7.fFhe’s:.1ppoftle1:§ “‘cf_Bl1aratiya Janatha Party created chaos “in

the respondent. Nos.7 and 8 to become the

–VAdhy’§{;gg1i’a;::i§:1 the Upadhyaksha.

3. The 1*” respondent has filed the objections

contending that the 3*” respondent. is an assisted soc_i__et.y.

The Zilla Panchayaith. Kolar, had granted a

Rs.1.00,000/~ to the 3?” respondent for the .

the Sahakari Bhavaria. During i.he.”ye_ar Zi1la..l

Panchayath had again granted a suiri-._of

3:-d respondent for cornpietioii-‘ll_ofaflthex’-eol11st.ructio:i1..__ot
Sahakari Bhavana. Thus, the Zillai: granted a
total sum of :.’~;–‘~..”_”»v..nresponderit. It is
further coritenciedthat Constitution

of India.”thesitatel:i§i(;ltide&s- Got?e1’i’iIiient and Legislature of
each Stai’.e: and _ or other authorities. The

expression ‘local aut_hoifity’…~~ir1cludes a panchayath or other

Within._..the defiiiiiion of local authority. Thus,

V’–.AfIi,{‘3’3-‘”.’] i’esponde1l_1t is an assisted society as defined under

Secticii the Karnataka Co~opei’ati.ve Societies Act,

fV1959ll(‘fol-Aashort. ‘the Act’). The nomiriatiori made by the

A ..fGoVle’:fiiri1e11i’. to the 31″” respondent. is just and proper.

5
s
5
E
‘3 $2

‘a.

4. Sri. D.N. Nanjunda Reddy. iearned Senior Counsel.

appearing for the petitioners siibniits that the 3″‘? respondent

.. ‘_r

is not an assisted society in accordance with section .’«.Z(a-._1_”‘}_oig

the Act. Therefore, the State Governrnent canno’i:—noniina-3e’.”-no *

members to ihe comrnittee of 111an.a.geme_nt “o£’_jih’e: V4_’3V=x1 ‘

respondent. It is further argued that ‘det’inii.ion

‘assisted society’ has been amended In

place of the word Government’,___the_wo1’ds..’G–oxrerI1n%1ent or
State’ has been substitn«t.erd_w_.e.§.’ The grant

made by the Zilla Panchay.at;h_éis to R3 are

dated 2G;1I’§ii9i913», and””3C:).O3.1996 respectively.
The grant iiiadedibyp Panchayath from 199496
canrlot betalien in.t_o holding the 3″-3 respondent

as an assisted ..so’ciety_ in~.V_the>’dyear 2010. The Zilla Panchayath

.._was included’ definition of the ‘Assisted Society’

Vewhen ‘Vt.’l’i=:”T.7vg’I”‘-Et1″‘Vi:’i””””‘~’5.r”‘E1S made. It is further submitted that the

vbvoi’i.1’ining these writ petitions for challenging

the Aorderai Ai.:’1nexL1z*e ‘D’ nominating respondent Nos.4 to 6

in the n’ia1iT–1giI1g committee of the 3″” respondent. They may

I
E
‘i

‘am

be permitted to avail the alternative remedy to challenge the

election of respondent Nosf? and 8 as the Adhy&§;l{Sll§t~.,_i§Ild._V”

the Uimdhyaksha of the 3*” respondent. beforet.he4’eonipet<en.t '

authority.

5. On the other hand. Srifl J_ayall{t:if_iia1′
Senior Counsel appearing for 1’es’poen_dent ltd Sasubmits
that th.e 3rd respondent assistaiice of
Rs.l,O0,000/– as per and another
sum of Rs.3,oci,oCfs:o7/_g plasippeii’ The Zilla

Panchayath is under Article 12 of the

Coiistitution.’ GoV’e.1’n.n1ei1t had given grant to the

Zilla PanchayathlV”f’o.rAVA’ purposes and the Zilla

Panchgayath. in tuifni has assisted the 31″” respondent out of

Talioncated by the State Government. Therefore, it

<23;-..i_1'ri'g_t;. be.'"sai(l."_'that the 3"' respondent is not an assisted

_societ:y. M. Keshava Reddy, learned Additional

:C}ove1fnnie*1.1.t Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2

, siibiiiitis that the 31" respondent is an assisted society having

E

'ii:

.1. 0

received t.he grant of Rs.4.00.000/– from the Zilla

Panchayath.

6. 1″I3.Vi1]g regard to the Conterltions L1I”g*:7:VC”1′.–.:..”1.I_}’.l’L~°_

question for consideration is whether the non1inat:.ion”

respondent Nos.4 to 6 made by the Sta.t;e_Govei4n’ri:ent’.tov’t.l’1e».V

managing committee of respondent N’o&.3

7. The State Government has
Nos.-4 to 6 to the committee ofivfithe 3?”
respondent “under Section.._”?9_(A1}V: oi: _bSectiAon 29(1) of

the Aetis as =..1nde;j:.,_ . _
“Nominees ‘qof._i}over;t1rnent on the

comrizjttee assisted co-operative
“State Government. may
V-‘….’no1r1.i11ate not'”‘n’1’o19e than three persons as its
..1’ep}fese’r1t.é1t._iVes on the eon1n1it.t.ee of any
soéiety of Whom one shall be a person

A ‘—..__be1Vo11gj.1i’gdto the Schedule Castes or Scheduled

Tribes and one shall be a woman.”

‘a

E

EX};

11

8. Section 2(a–1] of the Act defines the

‘assisted society’. Before the amendment. an ‘seciety ‘ ”

was clefined as under: I _ A __ u
“Assisted Society mearts a:«1._teo~op”e1jét.iye:
society which has reeeit/e~c:t the’-..Gcver31;ifi.entVV
assistance in the form of Capité{i’.0f’io}an’:Qr
grant or guaranteé;y_fo1* of lean
interest.” t t 2 V t’

come into force w.e.f.

3.11.20(f9_? theuzcfi-gi”A.t:¢,t;ve1*:tf1t;_e1it;’ has been substituted by

the words ‘C:C–‘ze1″h,1nent.’ot*’State’. The definition of the

” ‘~ ,.exp1f_essiQ_1:t ‘A_ssisté’d Society’ w.e.f. 3.1 1.2009 is as under:

_”‘AssAtsted.VSociety means a cooperative society”
“itgis_’.:1’eceived the Government or State
” ..”Vassi.st2t:rT1_ee in the form of share Capital or loan or

u”g;*2i’nt, guarantee for repayment of loan 01′

V . interest.”

flwwww-.u~
4
r” <4.3mw"

12

9. This Court in H. RAVEENDRA AND or.§1*eRs’__’___v*S_.__”‘

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS _.

6796/2007 disposed of on 5.1 1.2oh7);
validity of the nomination of its Ifepreésenttativesthy.
Government to the managing c§im§_”1:1,¢e of” to
the amendment of Sectien”~2_(a– In said Case,
the Ziita Panchayath had’g’;1=a;1{é’§1i1§ s.tgm.A*.’gf’11Rs.30,000/– to
the Society held that the
assistance vwould not make it a
grant not the ease of the
Governrnent tthdat a sum of Rs.30,000/~ by

way of _1oan’1’o.r the Ljonstrt.1f:t,ion of the building. Therefore,

the in qt1e”si.ion.is not an assisted society. The State

Go.vei=i.11I’ir:;1*It.has -no power to nominate its representatives to

the Vtdajapears that the said decision is the main

‘.f:*easoI1..fo1″ amending the definition of the expression

= . f’Assis.ted VSoeiei.y’.

13

10. Section 29(1) of the Act aiithorises the State

Government to nominate its 1’ep1’eseritatives

cominittee of any society. The word ‘Govemment'” -5rVet’e1f1’iectl to

in the definition of ‘assisted society’ is t.1ie'”.’*3tate C;}o.V:en’_imVe;nt’

exercising administrative or executive1autho1’ity.lv_~It”doesBlot ”

include local or other autho1’iti’e:sTI’–.’l’hat ‘§S vVl1:._,\_.’ “word
‘State’ has been i.ncludVed.__Ain Elie “”Wl”l’iCl’1l in the
context includes not only but also the
local authorities ‘well which include
the ‘instrumenta._lities’Il*_V_Qi- inf t_heWState or bodies or
inst.ituti:onlsf functions of the
governrnentlal authority is a 1’ep1’esent;ative

body, Whichizlclvtides Panchayath. It is an institution

._of se1l’~govei9nn1.e1_1t’in the rural area. If a co–operative

society i*eccifi=es’ assistance in the form of share capital or

1oan’o1l’ g1’an’t= of guarantee for repayment of loan or interest

fi’ror11 th.elStat:e, local authorities such as Zilla Panchayath or

2..fothe:*…¢at1thorities after the amendment of Section 2{a–i] by

* of 2010 w.e.i’. 3.11.2009, it can be treated as an

2
2

{{0wVV’nIW

‘_ gg
W

_)§» Oowezd
V; CI (2 C’..€?»w’ t”

(:7 imtg Y” (tn:§Q…c£

?rwo 52.010 1

%;99 ~«–Hr0t\”}Q.V€’fi
‘assisted soeietiy’,@)flFo’xridedithe noniination should be made

within a 1’€E1SO11ab1€ time from the date of providing. the

assistance.

11. in the instant: case, the Zilla p8I’1ICh:éfl33£it}i: had!”

given the grant of Rs.3,00,000/– in the ye.aff:v.1’ss2i…and’~1 T

which is clear from Annexures’–R_.1 toV”R”3i
period, the word ‘State’ was not of of the
expression ‘Assisted of the
respondents that the received the

aSSiSiaH(3’€”‘f:[‘G.}fIi.’ih6’£3118’PElf1Ch8oy3.’t}’1V’vaft€1″ the amendment of

Section t2′{a–“.lj. pteheeived by the Society some

time in the vctannot._t5e«.t5aken into account for treating it

as an”éLsSis’ted soc’iety_.____The nomination under section 29(1) of

sho.:,1’1dt’E1ave been made within a reasonable period

f]’Ofl,A”1.’t~t’~”J.’6 ..oiif:=feceipt. of the assistance. Since time is not

~Vst.ipu1atied’v.ain’f the statute, the power to nominate the

‘:i”TJf’l€§’iTib§§1’S should be exercised within a reasonable time from

date of rendering assistance. It is relevant to note here

15

that while defining the expression ‘assisted society’. present

perfect tense has been used. which clearly indicates~-that:

assistance must have been received in the in1n1e.dia1;_e’~past*–«

and not at any time in the past: Thl’ «.¢”‘«rdina.l_.V ‘r_Lu1lVe”‘l’oi’

Construction of statute is to readthe statute liteieally; that ‘V

by giving to the words ‘*0rdinary_; and
grammatical meaning unlesés tI:tat”leadsllVlto._sorne Vabstirdity or
the Words are susciptible the instant
case, the literal apbarent absurdity
and therefore’, compelling reason for
departing’ elonstruction. A Division
Bench oi’.thlis_ t SEETHEARAM BHAT Vs.

STATE 01%” reported in ILR 1993 KAR 2413

V. has V_tal:eV1}A simila1′.Vi_e_wv, which is as under:

‘ in the instant case, the State
go*.–,i’ei’11theI1t’, ceased to be a share holder because
Lhe__Alsubse1’ipLion made to the share capital has

A ‘-been returned. It cannot be considered that the
“State Government continties to be a member or

E

v t_veosttS’.’:’«:. I __ ‘

.16

it can be deemed to be a member only because
at some time past the State Government had
subscribed to the share Capital.”

[emphasis supplied by me)

12. In the light of the above discussion, M

View that the nomination made by Lhe”State’,G0V€i’1:*TDeVnt.dash”x

per the order at Anr1exure–D datedhl

authority of law. The Writ pending are”aeeordi’rigi}f”éLi1oi2ired
and the order at A1111e:s;t1re~D ‘i–1_.08.’2″0–1OA is} hereby

quashed. Liberty is reserved–.to to challenge

the Va1id’i’tey’i’o£;t§i1e éiez-c::dn._or re-:s”p”o’1’i’dent Nos.7 and 8 as the
Adhyakshha: emd _ of the 3″‘ respondent
before the eo;;ripet.eri__t ét:iiti1.ority in accordance with law. No

Sd/…*
Iudgg