AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.S. Patil, J.—Learned High Court Government Pleader is directed to take notice for respondents 1 and 3. In these writ petitions, petitioners are challenging the calendar of events published on 08.08.2013 by which elections are declared for the managing committee of the 2nd respondent-Doddagangawadi Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha Limited, Ramanagar District.
The grievance made in the writ petitions is that the 4th respondent who was earlier working as a Secretary was placed under suspension by the 2nd respondent-Society. Subsequently, he was reinstated because of the interim order of stay obtained by him in the proceedings initiated by him before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Ramanagar District. After he was reinstated, he has created documents showing that agricultural loan had been sanctioned by manipulating and forging documents thereby causing serious loss to the Society.
It is also urged by the petitioners that in order to wreck vengeance against the petitioners and certain others who had made allegations against him, he has not included the names of the petitioners in the voters list. It is urged that the notice dated 30.07.2013 issued to the petitioners as per Annexure-A and other similar notice informing them that they were defaulters and were required to discharge the loan within 15 days, failing which they would not be eligible to either vote in the election or contest to the post of Director was indeed dispatched on 13.08.2013 and were received by the members on 14.08.2013. 15.08.2013 being a holiday, the petitioners had discharged their dues on the next date itself. Thus, it is urged that though there was no default on the part of the petitioners, they have been treated as defaulters and are excluded from the voters list, thereby depriving them of an opportunity to contest the election or to vote in the election.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this action of the 4th respondent which is malafide and which is intended to deprive the petitioners of the opportunity to participate in the democratic process should not be encouraged and therefore, the calendar of events published deserves to be quashed.
Learned High Court Government Pleader strongly opposes this contention and urges that the petitioners have alternative remedy to raise the dispute, in case they are aggrieved by the action of the 4th respondent. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader, I find that the calendar of events has been published as per Annexure-C on 08.08.2013. This writ petition is filed on 20.08.2013. Election is scheduled to be held on 01.09.2013. Allegations made in the writ petitions are required to be proved by leading evidence. Petitioners have alternative statutory remedy u/s 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act to seek redressal. Therefore, the writ petition cannot be entertained.
Hence, reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail the alternative remedy, petitions are dismissed.
Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance within three weeks.