V.Ramachandrappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 January, 2010

5

AND:

. ag.

P. CHANDRAPPA,

S/O LATE DODDAPILLAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

R/O HARATI VILLAGE,

HUTHUR HOBLI,

KOLAR TALUK AND KOLAR DISTRICT.

SMTESYRAMMA,
W/O NARAYANAPPA,   
AGEO ABOUT 55 YEARS, '
R/O HARATI VILLAGE,
HUTHUR HOBLI,    ~ 
KOLAR TALUK AND KOLAR._OTSTR1CT. A  ,  ~ A

 I ...~-RErI'TIO,NERS
(BY SRI G CHANDRASEKHAP..1AH,*ADV)  

THE STAT.E,.OE..1<ARr§ATA}<A:: ' .
REP.BY I'%_'S      

SE:CRETAR'f.TQ"GO'.(_ERNMENT,
OERARTMENT«.O«§% 'CO:TO_RERAT1ON,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
M.S.E5U"I.LD'INGVS,7--._ 

3 g;3Are.GALORE_,"
"THE,'A.SS1,STANTmREG1STRAR OF

'=C_O~..,C)'PE"R,ATIVE SOCIETIES,
 KOLAR_S,Q'B--¥DIVISION, KOLAR

"-Y4.,N.i\:,'Av-SEAT, AGEO ABOUT 30 YEARS,

WORKING AS SENIOR INSPECTOR

.,  OF"£;'O--OPERATIvE SOCIETIES,
, "OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR
 -OF cO--OPERATI\/E SOCITIES,

KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR AND
RETURNING OFFIC , HARATI
MILK PRODUCERS O--OPERATIVE

1



SOCIETY LIMITED,
HARATI, HUTHUR HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK
AND KOLAR DISTRICT.

4 HARATI MILK PRODUCERS
COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT HARATI VILLAGE, HUTHUR-""" . _  _  _ 
HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND KO.LAI?;~DJ7S'i7RICT;- 

..7..__RE_SP0N'D_.ENTS. "  

(BY SRI SANGAMAIAH G."P}\'T1L, RCGP-§()vRVIP;vi"'& R2,
SRI H.S.RAMAMuRTHY & ASSOCIATES, ADVS, FOR R4)

THIS WP IS. FILED PRPLYINCI T"Ov.DEc;--L'ARE THAT THE
WHOLE ACTIoN«.._,OF LTHE_}R3:RE_TURN:Ii\JG OFFICER IN

ROSTPOINING*._ELE'CTIoN TO n,4,r;;..,COiv2ri«iITTEE OF THE R4
SOCIETY IN'DEi?IN1"f'E.LY"Q"N, "SILi%_x..GROuNDS AS PER ANN--

C, IS EAD1_'&I.LLEG_AL., I;*TC;.,' «. _

THIS -!3ETi*1T1._0;i'~i IS'-CO.M.ING ON FOR HEARING ON

T INTERLOCUTORY =A'PPLICi€\TIC_)NS THIS DAY THIS COURT

MADE THE..FOil_LO\NI'N:G,:  '

I ORDER

'  T_h.e_pVrayer made by the petitioner is for a direction to

 conduct elections of the respondent No.4

- SIO'Ciet_§r'as':"'Iper Calendar of events dated 13-06-2009 as per

  'Rrm_.exu'r*e--D.

2. It is submitted by the iearned Counsel for

petitioner that the eariier Committee of the respondent No.4

i



-- Society came to an end on 31-03-2009. Under Section
20(9) of the Karnataka Co--Operative Societies Act (in short

'the Act'), the Committee seized the existence,_:7a_nd

accordingly notification was issued to conduct e_l:e'ctioVn.s:,

it was postponed in view of the Parliamentary. 0»

3. Thereafter, respondent?' issued n  _

conduct elections and furthelr-.cai.enda'r ofie)/e.nts,"was"jalso'0

published. As per the ,caiendvar----fV.').f'--e'\:'--e,nts '06'+0.6:2i009 was
the date fixed for filing"*iiemii:ai;iene,'ie,'p:?,:4e6-2009 was the

date fixed for filing._nominaVtions_:'th:'ro,ug'h«iproposess. O9--06--

2009 w,asMtlh'ei wji'th:drawaVi"olf nominations and 13-06-
2009  the Ld'a'te_'l"foVr»..:conducting elections. In the

meantime, t'he_rei.w'asA'*.disturbance in the society and the

 imiefigi cpacmepto be'Ioci<'ed on 9.06.2009.

i'--is*~e.a"_j.resuit the Returning Officer has postponed

the »eliectio.n:s:',,inldefinitely and has issued an endorsement on

ll"=~v.___VCi9--O6--Z2.Q_i39 as per Annexure--K stating that in view of

0  "'~uAriforje'seen incidents the elections couid not be conciuded

and accordingly it was posipfoned. Now, for more than six

 



months no progress has taken place. Hence, he preferred
the present writ petition seeking direction for respondents to

conduct the elections.

5. The iearned counsel for petitioner subn_§i'tsf"g:'th'a.t

under Section 28-A (5) of the Act the  

been appointed to the Society and t:ii'de--r.Sei:'tioii'  of

the Act as early as possible within   

of endorsement new Committe_:e"~.has to,b'e_c'on'stituted in ''

accordance with law. Iai.owever,~-- °sa_i_d period is expired

and the respondent haste'Aho_I_d§'I'»lelelctiionis' from the stage

where  He_W'h'a's further relied on the
Judgment-. of V the'j_"A_pe.2tl"'»..Court in the case of N.P

PoNNuswAM"rvsit«.  returning officer, Namakkal

"'«--:ons-t_itiue_e.ty,. nNan'1'Val'<k'aiV, Salem District & others (AIR (39)

"sc'e»§i),'i'li».i}iiereiti the Apex Court held that after the

calendar _e\2eh'ri:s is published and elections was later

%°*.,.,_"obstructed; the further elections to be conducted from the

"stag:e"'where it was stopped.

i

E



(1

6. The iearned counsel for respondent No.4
submits that he has no objections to hold elections and the
learned Government i3!eader also supports the submissions

made by the learned counsel for Society.

7. I have heard the arguments advancé'd--«'.ibvy:_"tinVe"«_

parties.

8. From the material pilA"aced_ll'JinLietiigtionp

caiendar of events was pubiishe-.d an"dV._the_"electio'nswash

scheduied to be conducted on aslper Annexure--

D. When the Officer'#a_ppoi.n§te'd  proceed for

conducting .electi'on~s_V,4"therewas obstruction from discharging

his duty. Hence he 'has.-- an endorsement on 19~O6-

_ 2009¢,.§'Hei.has "stateid that some persons have iocked the

  izvhjelrey the elections have to be conducted and in

 ti1ie_~v.s_anje"'he was prevented from discharging of his

'_duties; b-.yMco"nducting elections and hence election was

, ..   postponed'.

'' '9. Even the period of six months was over in view

 of"iSection 28-B (3) of the Act' which cleariy says that 'as



early as possible within a period of six months from the date
of such endorsement, the respondents should have taken

steps to hold the elections'. From the submissions 

the respective counsel, it is clear that no further""actVi_o'n 

been taken by the respondents for  

Further, in view of the Judgment 

counsel for petitioner, the Apex_ Cou'i"t_rh'as helclrthéait  

process of elections is obstructe-d_'%'by eith'erfo'i': the parties,
then the Returning Officer hastt'o«._V_co'ri«tinue the election
process thereafter from tpheistwaae  stopped'. In

that view of the"ju;;rnatté~r, ithe en.do--r'semient issued as per

Annexure--D 'waVs"7aft..Aaitpimewhen the list of candidates was

also publishe__dllaVnd"itaVias,o'bstructed at that stage.
A:£.--(J.p Undeir' these circumstances the respondent No.3

.'V."'Si!'}Qlil'i'C1':. h"avel'..procee'ded to hold the elections by issuing

 under Section 28--B(3) of the Act. Hence,

I pro--c_eed.-toivlpalss the following order;

<'

 



 

ORDER

The wrd penhon 5 aflowed.”Huarespondehtfihhé;Es_
dhected to msue appropnate orders fin the derfies qnder»4E
Section 28–B(3) of the Act within’;

conduct the electrons from t!7,e_stag;V4é’;nrh-ere
The respondent No.2 is ais’t5T’r».:VV:.f”urtherx pass
apprornfiate orders in the Hgrfi dftdseiiudgrnent referred to

above.

The r3*’§):rtu’i’o!i}_ –0f:Ithe.Worder has to be
communvi’_c.a_ted..V%t’o ft.:!j::_eV_res’pdrA;den.tVV’§\!»ve.2 through the learned

Governnn_en.t ‘PleVa”e’.e~r».:”t

Sd/-3