High Court Karnataka High Court

Thimma Reddy S/O Timmpaa vs The Joint Registrar Raichur on 15 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Thimma Reddy S/O Timmpaa vs The Joint Registrar Raichur on 15 April, 2009
Author: Ravi Malimath
 nu"  

ax: THE HIGH COURT 01$ KARY%ATA¥~{3s~---- I 
CERCUIT BENCH AT QL:LBARGA'§._ '   " 
DATED THES 'mg. 15:}: my  
THE HCDEKFBLEE MR.Ju'$T§<3E RAvT2._§x:i1a=i';:1vi;a;f§~i' 3
wm? PE:'r1<i'{:@.;e :90";é0:§s9')"2Q09:SL'REs§4

BETWEEN: ' '  ' '
Thimma Rec§d§;'<sf'0   V' ' "
Occ: AER, Aga  years,    
R/0 RaicI1ur,,.'?hé§ffl1a1'fiifliiwtig " _ " V 
shazayg Naga1*,1'§§'aic"?1_ur.  ._ é  E.  PETITIONEZR
(By g;;:.gmé£e.;«.;33.__s;12o;gg;'~Ad«z3 _~
AND: "  4' * u ' 

1. 1' Tha J0ii1§.RE'gistfésr, 
'?R;a»i'<f3'1.fiI'~ " ..... ..
 V 'E'--hs"  Registxar,
TR'v.§;1§[:?fA§3¥111f;[~ . V V 

A  T'hc~  Rstgistrar 8:. &z:im'mis'£ra¥.01',

'Rkaichur.

' *4, Réichur Thsnnal Pawer Employctzs

 Cxgsnsumefs Ccroperativcz Socisty, Rajchur,

'  Shakthi Nagar, Raichur,

By its Sacrrstazjyn ..,REspQr~zQEm's

{£3}; Sriveeresiz B.Pati}, Adv for R4}



£'~.)

'I'hi.s WP. is filéiai u.nde1* Afiiclss '.226 "$1.16

Ciongtiiutian. of India pra5;i1::g to quash 1:h§::"  "d;§:{i3@,

'}'.=2,2€)09 vidc: AnneXurt:~('} passgiiby thv:--"1[*5'=" 

aflowing the apphcaiian filed by  }%:fi[iiii0unei9A'aI§d' §ff:13? '

ihe Carder Lmcler A:1.r1»-F' clatgzgi 13. i';2.i§:{}O8   th é'0 i*:3r:r

dataei "X23200? Vidfi Am1~G. _

This W'P. Ccymiiizg 011'vi"<5:*   this day,

{E16 Qaurt. made the f€$i1?ov:'Ai11--g;{f,V }  " «'
  A  

TITEAE;    the President of the 493
::"€.3;::s11:i§:j:'i:T.j§Tia:.>_f<;§)€1:23;fivé Sociéfié along with other committee
me1::i't;<;r:'~;  ' ~.s*.~..;:>§éraV5:':'9'§.»*€: Societies Act, 1951.}. (E11 the

" by V:~é€::?'ri1<?e of {km di1'er;:'E0r$ 0f '£116 Saciety, a I10fiC€:

 V T_i%:es§"is;S:iédV if) the petiiiener séaking his fixpianation to the

" 'f_;v:::::3i_§; was furriisiaed by the patitiencr 01:1 21..1C}.{"}8.

Tbs:  p{:fitioneI° contends that without cmnsiderizxég tha mpiy

 . fm"£1i§§h€t{i by him, this 12"' mspondetnt by ixnveking the:

provissimas sf Secfioil 30 of the: Act, superceded the
(:(3i1'1{11ifi€€: and appeinteci the gpecrial officer to the 455

respazzdent. Aggiiievaé by the samctt, the patitimzxer fflitfi an

 }



apgxezai under Sectien $06 of this Act and  an

interim may of the appoiritmtmt of the sgyeciai 9§?1{::é1'.'  

the matter was heard on 3,1.{}§3,""Vth<: .1$*. rt§s.;3i)'né:'£ei1t--.irejécteii' AV

the application for stay. Hence,A:'Ehé'--pf'<=:se£1£ .);z:$:ti. '~.. 

2y LC-8I'1'}Etd Clcmzlsei  peti'tV:};.F;i§'~,."'§_I;L'§'" aphpoint .21 speciai ofiftcer is the 4%

I:3Sp<3:iid€:i1€"., in  to his cententioxzs, he relied 011 a

.§1§<;:i:$*i0:1  «kvivhe A, case of Mun.iIa£;=;hmamm,a :2:-yfigpuiy

A W .. _§f;e;%'t:;;r.z:i:§§:iz;~;r;er gm Z988 KAR 28:4),

'   Lvé3;:r:"1&r:I Cguizssi for the 43*} :*€sp<::m:3.:::m submits

itixaigtfiére is no ermr Comnxiit-=32} by the }:'c?,ii,:i%:'_§+i;:=,1*,
the 2&1 raspenéenti a?PGi;§§l<:;i the   to t11e <¥1h
r&sp<mdsm:.. The  'spe€ia} <$ffi;t:sa19';"%.3:i€ said order i3 jusfifmble and hence,

A. :10 .i11ffif'f€1'€I1£Z€ iéecailetd far.

  -{¥::)'§~. fT'h<3ug11 tbs agpaal has bean {dad am} an intsrim

 b<::e:1 gmntsdk I find that no pI'€j1I(iiC€ wouki be

 ca.é;:1;s€;:'i.; to the petitioner. The czontmztion emf the petitioner

 n ,   the ffiing Qf the appeal itself would be iI1f1'uct1mus if the

 intarim order is not granted is Llnaccfiptahle in the given

ci1"cumsta::a.c6s ef the case and in View sf ths serricvus
afiégatioris of the petitioner. The right 01" £336 petiticsnar ta

mainfzxin an app<:.:--:§ is not' diS'€.11I°bf3(1 at all Hawtzvér, iieziia}

 4""



of .-3:1 interim cmier by the 181 respondent. is  just: in

{hrs given CiI'(‘?11}11St3jt1C€3S of the case. Tim 111303

bf; 1:116 petiiiaI1er’s (fl/:.11;.se1 is with r€farer§¢’£?.VVi.a.T.:fh’_e £;’:.’;_”

refusal at” interim stay wifizmiéj assigi1§ngTj’–ré:a5QLIiS,__ 131 this: :

2111319111. case, or: perusa}: gt’ t11 e’—-;”;e’ix1v.jo13.gz;),:::’t2’3=.A,
sees: that the I’espondeni$’ h:VéV§ refhefréci’ of
the pafitiwner Eiigan though the
331116 may nest Contézgixa’ as expected of, the

fu1di1;gs:.Gi’:.f:;h;?’r ré s.pQ:ié«E:1t$}”~i§g’h§1é Epsissing hnpugncti order

:§%0u1{i_Affi1e*.§s”;;§;i3€:;tcnf. of Law. The respondent who

paS.:;:§:ii _t.’z1$:2.V_ iL*§i}§:i,i5giT£é’C1″”‘C)f’Ci€1f mead not require ’03 givt: 3

,-:1.ataj_ieu{3 ._:§;’i16:”, ‘-E31? the irgstzagni case, the rej<2<::$:i:1 of the

«ié”fi3.eref<}re 311st agné proper and 1 (it) not 1311:?

–E?§if,f’Vi’:i:€fi’&§fj1f’1 .t0 infrzrfere with ‘ihfi impugneti order.

. ‘v{‘€:} L€ar1;.e£% {I’0uIzst:ti far 1325 ‘p€’::i?:i03f:€r n€,xfij; eenttizidztd

n tiriai his social statug staizfis efiecteé. ix; viexxv of thfi dsniai of

— t§”:z3 itztarim mfler, The saié carxiention ef the petitioner is

-xs3i1011}r unsustainabla. The qizssfieu of the personal
I’6:p:3t.ati<):r: {if {he p(étit§(3ncr dams met come into gflajg SQ far as

these pmceetiings are <re:r:x1€€d

mm

is pexfomn his Sf§3.{E1E(J-}.”‘}’ 0b1igaT_io11-s and he is 11:3′: ttxzxdfziing

813.}? ptzrsonal service in the sociaty. The crampliancc-.éfV1;-iwi’is’

?;h€:}”€ftZ)1E’€ required by such 2.11 ofiicétr wh0H__ha–s 56811 so

electsid. Even Qthewaiset if the cetééiucfi ‘of the-I ‘pa_t;ii§{;I;é’r’V 137

fomzd to be 1161: in a<tco1"da11ce.with 1aw, –ih€ qtgézsilozi ef }.%1i:s

persanal statug therfifore xs£7ii’1z:i “‘~:<}.<)'t }:i::._Vefi?§€:te:éib any

II1EiIl,1}€1'.

5. Hence; $3116 petifi-an is daveid” (if n’ic1friTfS and the same

is I’fij€CV§ffif3….,v _ ;

Sd/~
IUDGE

S151.” ‘ ‘ ‘V