Delay In Conducting Elections Of Tumkur Co-Operative Milk Producers Societies Union Due To Parliamentary Elections Justifiable: Karnataka HC
The Karnataka High Court observed that Parliamentary elections were a justifiable reason for the delay in adhering to the timeline of the due elections of the Tumkur Co-operative Milk Producers Societies Union Ltd. (Co-op).
Stating the disinclination to interfere in the election process of the Co-op, the Bench stated that no further order was required in elections when the timetable was also notified and the election schedule was declared. The Co-op had filed an appeal challenging the administrative decisions and election schedules previously set by the State Authorities.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice K.V. Aravind observed, “The Parliamentary elections was a justifiable reason and a good ground for inability to adhere to the timeline, since the entire administrative staff and machinery were preoccupied and occupied in the general elections. The due elections to the Board of the Society were inevitably delayed.”
Sr. Advocate D.R. Ravishankar represented the appellants, while Addl. A.G. Prathima Honnapura appeared for the respondents.
The President and Directors of the Co-op (appellants) argued against the order by a Single Judge, which listed the conditions under which the Co-op’s elections must be conducted.
The issue arose regarding the election procedures for the Board of Directors of the Co-op, whose term had expired, necessitating fresh elections. Initially, the State government extended the board members' term via a notification but subsequently rescinded this extension. Eventually, the High Court directed adherence to statutory requirements under Section 28-A(4) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (the Act).
The Court noted that the grievance of the appellants was that the election ought to have been held early and further wanted directions to revise and reschedule the election programme to complete the elections as the term was already over and the elections were overdue. stated, “Pragmatism and flexibility are not alien aspects in deciding the election schedule, without sacrificing the higher democratic principle,” the Bench added.
“The election calendar has already been set and the process of election has commenced. The stages have started from the month of May-2024. The dates are fixed to provide the different stages as statutorily required. Any interjection by the court in the election programme, at this stage, would on the contrary unsettle the elections, which are already underway. The court would not tinker with and upset the election programme.” the Court remarked.
Consequently, the Court found no serious irregularity committed in notifying the elections at a later stage.
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the appeal.
Cause Title: Sri C V Mahalingaiah & Ors. v. The State Of Karnataka & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KHC:23741-DB)
Appearance:
Appellants: Sr. Advocate D.R. Ravishankar; Advocate Nagaraju
Respondents: Addl. A.G. Prathima Honnapura; A.G.A. Niloufer Akbar; Advocate A.C. Balaraj