IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NOs.53433-53440/2014 (CS-RES) BETWEEN:
1. AIRCRAFT EMPLOYEES CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., NO.1, III FLOOR, 1ST CROSS, C.K.C. GARDEN, OPP. B.I.O. HOSPITAL, K.H. ROAD, (DOUBLE ROAD) BANGALORE-560 027 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT 2. SRI. N. DEVARAJ S/O LATE PATEL NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, PRESIDENT, AIRCRAFT EMPLOYEES CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., R/AT CHEEMASANDRA, VIRGONAGAR, BANGALORE-560 049.
3. SRI. R. GANESH GANDHI S/O K. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, VICE PRESIDENT, AIRCRAFT EMPLOYEES CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., R/AT NO. 313/3, VENKATAPURA NEW EXTENSION, 6TH CROSS, KORAMANGALA POST, HSR 4TH SECTOR, BANGALORE-560 034.
4. SRI. M.A. GOPALASWAMY S/O ANDANIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, DIRECTOR, AIRCRAFT EMPLOYEES CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., R/AT SITE NO. 142, CORNER, ITI EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., NAYANDAHALLY, BANGALORE-560 063.
5. SRI. T. VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O LATE LAKSHMAN AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, DIRECTOR, AIRCRAFT EMPLOYEES CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., R/AT 40, 3RD CROSS, 2ND PHASE, 1ST STAGE, CHANDRA LAYOUT, BANGALORE.
6. SRI. T.P. DAYANADAREDDY S/O BILLAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, DIRECTOR, AIRCRAFT EMPLOYEES CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., R/AT NO. 201, RAMAGONDANAHALLI, BANGALORE-560 066.
7. M. SANTOSH S/O MUKUNDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, #19, 29TH MAIN, 29TH B CROSS, KAGGADASAPURA, C V RAMAN NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 019.
8. T.D. KRISHNAPPA S/O DADDASHANIAH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, "ANANTHA SAMRUDHI"
NO.14/105, 8TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, NANDHINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 096.
9. C. SRINIVASMURTHY S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, NO.60/4, R/A ANJANANDRI ROYAL NEST, 3RD MAIN, 4TH CROSS, KSRTC LAYOUT, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 061. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R. PATIL, ADV. FOR SRI. MAHAMAD TAHIR A., ADV.) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. REGISTRAR OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, ALI ASKER ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
3. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, ALI ASKER ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DILDAR SHIRALLI, HCGP FOR R1–R3.
SMT. B.V. VIDYULATHA, ADV. FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT ON IA 1/16) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 09.10.2014 VIDE ANNEX-B PASSED BY THE R-2.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioners are before this Court assailing the order dated 09.10.2014 impugned at Annexure-B to the petitions.
2. The petitioner No.1 is the Society. The remaining petitioners are the office bearers claiming to be aggrieved by the order dated 09.10.2014 and are before this Court.
3. The respondent No.2 through the order dated 09.10.2014 on invoking the provisions under Sections 109 and 111 of the Co-operative Societies Act, has passed the order to initiate action against the petitioners for the alleged misdemeanor that is referred to in the petitions. The petitioners therefore claiming to be aggrieved by the same are before this Court assailing the said order.
4. Though contentions are put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioners to contend that the conclusion as reached by the respondent No.2 is not justified, at this stage, it is unnecessary for this Court to go into that aspect of the matter, inasmuch as the order on the face of it would reveal that it is passed without opportunity to the petitioners and without securing the version of the petitioners on the aspects that have been referred to in the order.
5. Therefore, the order in any event cannot be sustained for violation of principles of natural justice and also non-compliance of the provision as contained in Section 111 (3) (i). In that view, the order impugned is quashed. Liberty is however reserved to the respondent No.2 to issue fresh notice and thereafter proceed further in accordance with law, if the need to proceed still subsists.
The petitions are accordingly disposed of. In view of the disposal of the petitions, I.A.No.1/2016 is unnecessary to be considered herein.
Sd/- JUDGE ST