---- w -ww~m-- mun Luum Ur KARNATAKA HIGH COURT o:= KARNATAKA men cous
AT BANGALORE % % _
Dated this the 28*" day of 017» ' ' H
:1: 'ms men scum' or
mm I-IOIPIILE HR Juanim
Writ Petition dt:2,,;;_¢0,_;c§,LE 'V
§
1 SRETPVENKATRRAMANA.»
s/o SRIPULLAPPA i = '
AGE 68":'EAR$"" 1
R/0;NCz~_38, 3'11-1 1\_,wN ROM") ..
KSRTC ::;A¥;oU'1\ J «P NAGLAR
I15P1*L'.\3'5E'; "B£NC"='=A'i-,0"R~E"'¢ 78 '
2 1111 --~s3R;'K G ('}H1TRASRKHAR.4.-PPA
I Si0'K_1vG.VMUR5G'flPPA. '
ms: 53'?-Eggs '
- M0 N0 6o;s'm..«_mArN
'syn CROSS; -
J PNAGAR 111 PHASE.'
V BANGALORE'. 5600'?§ PE'f'i'!'IONERS
Baaavaraju. H.N., Adv. for
MR. Rajagopal, Adv.]
.sTAT£5"'0F'k$.re1siATAKA
r l\I"lIII Ir' I-:1:-'aw
BY rrs SECRETARY
_ " e 1.01:' C0-OPERATION
. 'M' S. BLHLDING
' TBANGALORE 550 001
' REGISTRAR OF co-oz» SOCIETIES
" ~ ,1»: KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
A ~ .. ALI ASKER ROAD
BANGALORE 52
-V-M v' '~MM'HIHI\H HIV" \--UtJIlf1.w,r RAKNHIAKR Hibfl LUUKI OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR
2
3 THE JOINT REGISTRAR or
C0-C1? SOCiE'I'IES
BANGALORE REGION
(3 M c BUILDING
PAMPA MAHAKAVI ROAD
CHAMARAJPET
BANGALORE 560 018 I
THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR
OF CO-OP SOCIETIES»? _ -,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT ''
NO 145 MALLESHWARAM CO-O'P_ SO:ClE'l'Y' "I
BUILDING, am MAINROAD,1""' -.
MARGOSA ROAD : V. *-
MALLESHWARAM, ~
BANGALORE560003 '- _
TI-IE KARNA'FfiKA- SI'!§1TE; RCSAD. .1 .,
TRANSPO_R?'I_'
CENTRAL QFEICE-'.EMP1;9_?'~JE3
URBAN HQU.sr.:1;BU1i;DiNG .. '
BY;ITSSE€1PVETARYi-.F??1c'ER '
NO 2:26,! MAIN RQAD',' ROAD
v BLOCK, I PHASEASHIVg'e.NAGd\R
BANGALORE 550-. 0421
111521 LTN PRAxA'sz1..rAUPrA
ms 59 YEARS
Q " 'I 12 /0,_PRAv.A'n111<A
-an-1 'A'.r.sA11;~.:RoAn, 4'11»: BLOCK
I' ,JAYA!'£AGAR
BANGALORE 560 011
A , 13121 SLINDARAPPA
ENQUIRY OFFICER AND
w.-'SENIOR INSPECTOR
OF CO-OP SOCIETIES
O/0 JOINT REGISTRAR OF' CO-OP SOCIETIES
BANGALORE REGION (3 M 0 BUILDING
PAMPA MAI-IAKAVI ROAD
CHAMARAJAPET BANGALORE 560 018
v--- w -------w- mwv wum ur zwmmnm men COURT OF KARNATAKLA 1-man coua
3
8 SR! 8 SAMPATHRAJE URS
PRESIDENT
THE KARNATAKA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT' CORPN
CENTRAL omcs EMPLOYEES
URBAN $10033 BUILDING V
CO«OPSOCIE'I"{ LTD ._ .; _ w
NO. 226,IMAIN ROAD, 601?"? E03,!) A
VBLOCIUPHASE N =
SHIVANAGAR BANGALORE " .~.".'.' RE§$PONDEN'1'S
[By Smt. Asha. M. Ku'1V9fib$rg¢:1'iméitE1,'&_xf4lt'.;:';C}P:f::)r R1-R4;
Sri. G. Chandraghekaraiah, Adv. fez.'_R5..3s R8;
Sri. D. Adva. for R6]
THIS PE'I'I1'IONIS.F'I£,EvD {INS-3Ei?_';'!.R'i_?ICLES 226 AND 227 01?
THE C0NS1TFvU'PION.GF.INDIA,A mavmfirro QUASH THE ENQUIRY
REPOR/r smmr1*'rE:3 BY '_If§-If3.._!?EES?ONDEN'F AS WELL AS 4m
Rssponnygmiijirr. .31,1'.2006_ V153 ':'~;h'NEX.T3 AND UP. 17.2.2005
AS PER;~AH?$EX..P..*1 RES«PI*1C'!'iVE!:i' AND ALSO THE: ORDER PASSED
THEREIN BY R3 D1'. v:DE"zx:i:;~:§:x.A*I'2~'gs1~:n E'I'C.,
THIS PE1"3*i1'6NTA dovmiiéé ..'}¢~oR i57R'Ei,:M1NARY HEARING,
13* GROUP, THI'.§i_DAY, THE THE FOLLOWING:
4__.V.Petiti;):i;1'<=§rs*. are are fomaerly part of the
__of the ftfith respondent-cooperative
Vv as president and the
§d;:icty respectively. It appears, during
V _ «..Qf i)etitioneI’s, they had either managed or
Z the affairs of the society. Some of the
of the society being of the View that it was mom
‘—–v-” v- W’-=-W”-miw “M” \-vvnuar Iv-Imvm-mun rllum LUUKI Ur KAKNAIAKA HEGH COURT 0!’ KARNATAKA HIGH COUR7 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR
4
mismanagement than any management, a
complaint which resulted in an cnq1firg~’§etid
report having further being,
resulted in the petitionerey their:
respective oflices. p;’esefkt.__ is in the
context of seeldngfor refiefi…
(G)
quash ezcbrrtitted by the
‘V 4″‘ Respondent
1′{o.No,_ _§¢$c§o~’23:moaa°&.eb:154/2003-
V A3’!/}f)I,(’20O6 as per Ame
V 3.z5c9a’a3:r§,5:9’7/2003-04
_vdaéied.:3»7/02/2605 as per Annexure-R1
. ” and also the Order passed
=”the 3″‘ Respondent bearing
” V N’o.No_. “§,,.;fa;«2easé.~154/2oo4~o5 dated
‘V O2/2006, as perxlnreg,
Issue’ in the nature of mandamus
the 1*’ Respondent certiorari to
X the sale deed exemtted by the sa-
‘ Respondent in favour of the 6*”
Respondent, as per Annmcure-G in
Document No.BNG(U}KNG:R/15264/200}
2003 dated 1 1/10/2001,
issuewrétinthenatureofmwzdamus
directing the 1-” Rwpondent by an
independent Ofiioer not below the rank of
the Sewetary ofthe Department of Co-Op.
Dept. to conduct an enquiry on the alleged
— -v-Ir-I 1–Hr-Irv-v “Eur! LUUKI U!’ IKARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR
5
charges made against the 5% Resppiadent
by the Petitioners and to subnzit,¢:–frepon
wzd there upon to direct
take necessary actions
proposed emzuw vfmtéfizplatedk _ ‘
(cl) issue writ in thejtature qf’.
quash the of
as per A V }§Ia.A/I/M/
DAP/ 3/ 02/ 05/2006,
(‘9) issue %j’:’t?ze ‘nature: of mandamus
to appoint to
qfits power (1/3 31 of
” true Societies Act.
A;5u5 br:gsfA:’*fl;e«..j§1rg3’ers, prayer (a) is for quashing the
sale deed execurgd Vt:-gs in favour of sixth
respondent.f;i1idA.to ffesh enquiry by quashmg the
ear;1’ic_1_’V __ The petitioners have also sought
{pr tit) Efifi to appoint a special ofiicer to
sc;ciety’.By. éjfizitismg his power under Section 3 1 of the
Societies Act, 1959 [for short, the
V
6
3. It appears, the petitioners had an
appeal under Section 106 of the Act of
cooperative societies, .1:
report, but the appeal e’1’1′:
endorsement dated that L’ the
petitioners are so in respect of
any orders passed of cooperative
‘-V’-“” V’ *V'””‘H’HN” “EU” ‘-U!-Ifltf Ixnlmlalnnn HIUH LUUKI U!’ KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAXA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR
societies._ .
4. Notices iespondems and they
have (-3Il’i’.,§I’e__(l.A counsel. Ms Asha M
Kumbarage government -pleader is
V I to 4; respondents 5 and 8 are
% Sri o Chandxashekarmah’ and the xixth
;espeeeeeee’ie by sad I) Prabhakar and Sri o
A
D Prabhakar, learned counsel for the sixth
’11” submits that the sixth respondent is a person
“srho has been allotted a. site and a bonafide member and
—- -v -vw-n-n-w mun ~.u-nu w mm-uumsn more com? or KARNATAKA HIGB come
7
no illegality on the part of the society in aflottiti’g_’fl1e site;
that on the other hand, it is the petitioIi.efe’«’ not
even paid the value of the
their favour.
6. Learned counsel would also
submit that the to the enquiry
on the complaint is yet to be put into
action; us who are facing a
series of er1qui1’ie:ss;V.V enquiry, their
lapses were from their
ofiices and in is nothing that is
to court in the present writ
dial} tlzvewregisn-ax is required to take
to the enquiry report in terms
ez_1.x§exu1e«V writ petition.
V submitted that the present enquiry report
did’:£$¢§t,_r§B1ate to the petitioners’ action per se, but action
If ” ‘the part of the successor management after the
‘IunYHV’I’I \II
8
petitioners ceased to be in the management. society
etc.
8. Be that as it may, i_¢rr;’:1; of
issued to quash a sale deed, W11ichE\exe€:a1t€xi by at private
cooperative society in of its is open to
the petitioners to it that may
be availablefor The return of their
appeal é=-fziixiotfsejiieiit-~V’:at Annexure-V is more
“”‘”””‘”””‘*’ “”9” \-“-WIUA V-“‘lV”r NHHIVHIHAA mvrs uuum Ur KAKNAIAKA Hlbr-I LUUIH Ur IKAKNAKAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HEGH COUR
than justified, tfi-3;” in the very
endorsement an appeal does
not lie ayjnst Section 106 of the
Act? V. An «fies against a consequential
direc~tjot1:’a.t1d sought to be executed based on the
._ under Annexuve-‘I’-3 is yet to
V learned government pleader points out that
registrar had issued directions to the
of the society in terms of the communication
,,(g/
“”””””””‘ *-V’-“” W’ MKNAIAM 2-man COURT OF KARNATAKA H!Gi-i cow?
9
dated 5-1 1-2005 {copy at Annexure-Y to the_petition]
along with the additional documents _vwrit
petition, pointing out that ‘liyeeiiofe
that the enquiry has :};¢os§:edtcrsate_i:-§’av§ur V
of sixth respondent for’of’ “sale
below the market; to be some
collusion in the management and the
purchaserfé was required to
take the site into its
will be taken against the
o’tt::’§e._.’pi*ov’isions of the Act etc.
10. Howevfijex’, -leardned for the sixth respondent
by’. to Annexure-T-2 dated 6-2-2006
registrar, submits that the
tat had been enquired into and an
2 ‘V . be passed with certain directions and it
K’ ddaeddtttough the complaint has not been examined
d
10
11. If the petitioners in so far as the action”: against
them for removing from their offices had
approached the higher autléiorifies ‘
earlier round of nugasipn oad V A those
proceedings had come and; it yet
again in this w1’it;::;5etiti-.;5oé_ far’ as their complaint
against in terms of any
further ‘up:acfion is requ:red’ to be
LUUKi LII’ RHKNHIHRH HIUH \..\JUK!’,1—“._|” KHKNHIHRH HIV” LUUK’ U!” IKHKNHIHIKH HIUH LLJUKI L)!” RAKNHIHRH !’lI|.Jl”l RUDE! Ur RHKIVMIHRF ruvru \u\I|Jl\
taken, the provisions to
take such action __o.sx in tersxs of the Act.
12. In the this writ petition is disposed of
with to second respondent registrar to tako
__ in respect of all reports Where
‘V is kin the matter of enquiry conducted
the– bearers of fifth respondent society, which
Z 2: so far looked into and disposed of by the
The registrar to do such action within three