Co-Operative Society Elections | Writ Petition Challenging Electoral Roll Maintainable Only In Exceptional Cases: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court observed that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to challenge the electoral roll on grounds of non-compliance with the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules is maintainable only in exceptional cases.

Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde observed that the preparation of electoral roll under Rule, 13-D(2-A) of the Karnataka Co-Operative Rules 1960 is an integral part of the election process.

Senior Counsel MR Rajagopal appeared for the petitioners, while AGA Sidharth Babu Rao and Senior Counsel Jaykumar S Patil, along with others, appeared for the respondents.

In this case, the petitioners, claiming to be members of the 6th respondent-bank, sought a direction for the Bank to redo the draft voters' list and for the election officer to conduct Board elections by finalizing the voters' list in accordance with Rule 13-D(2-A) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960.

One prayer related to appointing an administrator, which became irrelevant as an administrator was already appointed. The court, in an interim order dated 04.01.2024, allowed the publication of the election calendar, permitting voting on 21.01.2024, with the judgment reserved.

The petition challenged the Bank's process in preparing the voters' list, alleging a violation of Rule 13-D(2-A). The respondents argued that the petitioners should use Section 70(2)(c) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, to challenge the voters' list and questioned the maintainability of the writ petition. Earlier court decisions of Mohammed Beary and HS Raju were cited, holding that challenging the voters' list after the calendar's publication is not maintainable.

The petitioners contended that their case, filed before the calendar's publication, distinguished it from the cited judgments, arguing that the writ petition should be maintainable, citing an Apex Court ruling emphasizing the maintainability of writ petitions to ensure fair and smooth elections. The petitioners challenged the precedents as per incurium.

The High Court arrived at the following conclusions:

(a) The preparation of electoral roll under Rule, 13-D(2-A) of the Karnataka Co-Operative Rules 1960 is an integral part of the election process in the context of a question whether the writ petition is maintainable when the challenge is laid to the procedure initiated for preparing electoral roll. 

(b) In a dispute under Section 70(2)(c) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, the Authority under Section 70 can decide the question on the validity of electoral roll prepared under the Rules, 1960 and its impact on the election. 

(c) The judgments in Mohammad Beary and HS Raju are not per incurium.

(d) The writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India to challenge the electoral roll on the ground of noncompliance of Rule 13-D(2-A) of Rules, may lie in exceptional cases. 

In light of the same, it was held that, "no exceptional case is made out in this petition to exercise Article 226 jurisdiction."

Subsequently, the returning officer was directed to count the votes cast in the election held on 21.01.2024, to the Board of the 6th respondent bank, and announce the results. 

Appearances:

Petitioners: Senior Counsel MR Rajagopal, Counsel AC Balaraj

Respondents: AGA Sidharth Babu Rao, Senior Counsel Jaykumar S Patil, Counsels TL Kiran Kumar, A Mahammed Tahir

Cause Title: B Ganganna & Ors. vs The State of Karnataka & Ors.

Click here to read/download the Judgment