Sri Sathish K R v. The State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.13579 OF 2026 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. SATHISH K.R. S/O RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT KADATHANAMALE VILLAGE, ARAKERE POST, HESRAGATTA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK.

PRESENTLY SERVING AS DIRECTOR, KADATHANAMALE MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, KADATHANAMALE VILLAGE, BENGALURU NORTH - 562 136.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. RAVI SHANKAR K., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶2THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION AUTHORITY 3RD FLOOR, TTMC 'A' BLOCK, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA NC:(2026:KHC:23006( WP(NO.13579(OF(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( ,

3., THE,DEPUTY,REGISTRAR,OF,, CO-OPERATIVE,SOCIETIES, BENGALURU,URBAN,DISTRICT,, ALI,ASKAR,ROAD,, BENGALURU,-,560,001., ,

4., THE,ASSISTANT,REGISTRAR,OF, CO-OPERATIVE,SOCIETIES, BENGALURU,URBAN,DISTRICT,, ALI,ASKAR,ROAD,, BENGALURU,-,560,001., ,

5., KADATHANAMALE,MILK,PRODUCERS,CO-OPERATIVE, SOCIETY,LIMITED,, (SOCIETY,REGD.,UNDER,THE,KARNATAKA, CO-OPERATIVE,SOCIEITES,ACT,,1959), KADATHANAMALE,, ARAKERE,POST,, BENGALURU,NORTH,TALUK,-,562,136., REP.,BY,ITS,SECRETARY., ,

6., SHRI.,SATHIS,M., S/O,M.,MUNIYAPPA,, AGE:,MAJOR,, R/AT,NELLUKUNTE,VILLAGE,, HESARAGATTA,HOBLI,, DODDATUMAKURU,RURAL,, DODDATUMKUR,, BENGALURU,NORTH,-,561,203., , …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,YOGESH,D.,NAIK,,AGA,FOR,R1,,R3,AND,R4;, ,SRI.,A.,DEVARAJU,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R2;, ,SRI.,NAVEEN,KUMAR,S.R.,,ADVOCATE,FOR, ,SRI.,GANASHEKAR,S.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,C/R6;, ,V/O,DATED,25.04.2026,,NOTICE,TO,R5,DISPENSED,WITH), , , ,

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER DATED 24TH APRIL, 2026 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 IN CASE NO. ARB-44/DISQUALIFICATION 29-C/01/2025-26 VIDE ANNEXURE-M; AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 24th April, 2026 (Annexure-M) passed by the respondent No.4 in Case No.ARB-44/Disqualification/29-C/01/2025-26.

¶2Heard Sri. D.R. Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of Sri. Ravi Shankar K., appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1, 3 and 4; Sri. A. Davaraju, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2; and Sri. Naveen Kumar S.R., learned counsel on behalf of Sri. Ganashekar, appearing for the respondent No.6.

¶3Sri. D.R. Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to order 24th February, 2025 (Annexure-E) passed in Writ Petition No.3373 of 2025 and order dated 13th March, 2026 (Annexure-

L) passed in Writ Petition No.21353 of 2025 and contended that the parties were relegated to contest the dispute filed under Section 29-C of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'KCS Act').

¶4By referring to order dated 18th April, 2026 (Annexure-N) and order dated 31st March, 2026 (Annexure-N1) passed by the respondent No.4 in the impugned proceedings bearing Case No.ARB-44/Disqualifiaction/29-C/01/2025-26, it is argued by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the respondent No.4 passed the impugned order dated 24th April, 2026 (Annexure-M), without providing an opportunity to the petitioner and no notice has been served to by the petitioner in person. Therefore, learned Senior Counsel sought for interference of this Court.

¶5Per contra, Sri. Naveen Kumar S.R., learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 submitted that the Notice has been served to the close relative of the petitioner and the petitioner is well aware about the proceedings. Therefore, he sought to justify the impugned order dated 24th April, 2026 (Annexure-M) passed by the respondent No.4.

¶6Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1, 3 and 4 argued in the lines of respondent No.6 and sought to justify the impugned order passed by the respondent No.4.

¶7In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, on perusal of the writ papers, the same would indicate that, this Court, by order dated 13th March, 2026 (Annexure-L) passed in Writ Petition No.21353 of 2025, wherein challenge has been made to the Notice dated 11th June, 2025 calling upon the petitioner to appear for the proceedings initiated under Section 29-C of the KCS Act, directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent No.4. In culmination of the same, the impugned proceedings were continued by the respondent No.4.

¶8Perusal of the order sheet in the impugned proceedings produced at Annexure-N makes it clear that the Notice issued to the petitioner by the respondent No.4 has not been served to the petitioner personally, instead, the same has been served to one Smt. Komala. In that view of the matter, I find infraction of principles of natural justice to the petitioner

Therefore, order dated 18th April, 2026 (Annexure-N) and the impugned order dated 24th April, 2026 (Annexure-M) passed by the respondent No.4 in Case No.ARB-44/Disqualification/29-C/01/2025-26 are hereby set-aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent No.4 to re-consider the issue afresh after providing an opportunity to all the parties.

¶9Since the parties are represented through their respective learned counsels, in order to avoid further delay in the matter, parties are directed to appear before the respondent No.4 on 18th May, 2026 at 02.30 p.m. without waiting for an further notice from the respondent No.4. The respondent No.4 is directed to expedite the hearing. With this observation, writ petition stands disposed of.

SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

ARK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1