IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 05th DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.641 OF 2016 (GM - KSR) BETWEEN:
B.D.A. EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION (REGD), OFFICE OF BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY COMPOUND, KUMAR PARK WEST, BANGALORE – 560 020.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
(BY MR. JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SR. COUNSEL FOR MR. SACHINDRA KARANTH K., ADV.) AND:
1. THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, NO.17, MARUTHI PLAZA, 2ND FLOOR, 2ND MAIN ROAD, VAIYALIKAVAL EXTENSION, BENGALURU – 560 003.
2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KUMARA PARK WEST, SANKEY ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 020.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
3. SRI.B.M.CHIKKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, S/O LT.MAYAGAIAH, NO.114 CEHBCS, 1ST CROSS, 8TH MAIN, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 040.
… PETITIONER 4. SRI.RANGASHAMAIAH M., AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, S/O LT.MUTHAIAH, NO.15, 2ND CROSS SANJEEVINI NAGAR, MUDALAPALYA, BENGALURU – 560 072.
5. SRI.CHANDRASHEKAR M., AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, S/O LT.MALLAIAH, NO.237, 7TH MAIN, BCC LAYOUT, NEAR CHANDRA LAYOUT WATER TANK, BENGALURU – 560 040.
6. SRI.MUNIRAJU N., AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, S/O LT.NARAYANASWAMY, NO.18, CHIKKANNA NILAYA, 1ST CROSS, K.H.ROAD, RMR EXTENSION, BENGALURU – 560 027.
7. SRI.MUNITHIMMAIAH P., AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, S/O LT. KENCHAPPA, NO.482, GUDDADAHALLI MAIN ROAD, R.T.NAGAR POST, BENGALURU – 560 032.
8. SMT. RAJAMANI K., AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, D/O SRI.KANNAN, NO.128, BAZZAR STREET, VANNARPET, VIVEKNAGAR POST, BANGALORE – 560 047.
9. SMT. KHADER BI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/O LT.AMEER, P.NO.154, 4TH CROSS, PEDDANNA LAYOUT, 80 FEET ROAD, SIDDANNA PALYA, BANGALORE – 560 043.
10. SMT.LAKSHMI DEVI S., AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/O LT. NARAYANAPPA, N.M.RESIDING AT NO.219, 4TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, 4TH STAGE, BASAVESHWARANAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 079.
11. SRI.CHINNAPPA G., AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, S/O LT.JUNJAPPA, NO.16, 1ST CROSS, MUNISWAMY GOWDA LAYOUT, OPPOSITE SINDHI COLLEGE, KEMPAPURA, HEBBAL, BANGALORE – 560 024.
12. SRI.KRISHNAPPA H.V., AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, S/O LT.VENKATAGIRIYAPPA, HOSPET VILLAGE, JANGAMAKOTE POST, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKBALLAPURA – 562 102.
13. SRI.PANDURANGA RAO D.L., AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, H/O LT.PUSHAPA BAI, RESIDING AT NO.54/K, 13TH CROSS, 1ST BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 010.
14. SRI.SHIVARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, S/O LT. SHANKARAPPA, NO.279, 74TH CROSS, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 078.
15. SRI.NARAYANASWAMY R., AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, S/O LT.RAMAKRISHNAPPA, NO.2364, 10TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS, VIJAYANAGAR, 2ND STAGE, MYSORE – 570 017.
16. SRI.NARAYANAPPA K., AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, S/O LT. KADIRAPPA, NO.1, PATALAMMA NAGAR, BIDARAHALLI, VIROGNAGAR POST, BANGALORE – 560 049.
17. SMT. MUMTAZ, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, WIFE OF LT.HASANSAB, RESIDING AT NO.3, MUNIVENKATAPPA LAYOUT, KALKERE VILLAGE, HORAMAVU POST, BANGALORE – 560 043.
18. SRI.M.SUBRAMANYA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O LT. MUNISWAMY, NO.652, 6TH MAIN, 6TH CROSS, HAL 3RD STAGE, INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 075.
19. SRI.V.LAKSHMINARASIMHA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, S/O LT.VASUDEVA RAO, NO.12, 1ST CROSS, 2ND STAGE, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BANGALORE – 560 078.
20. HANUMANTHARAYAPPA N., AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, S/O LT.NARASEEYAPPA, NO.3390/46, 5TH MAIN, 3RD CROSS, HAMPINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 104.
21. SRI.V.ASWATHANARAYAN, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, S/O LT. VENKATASWAMAPPA, NO.48, 7TH MAIN, NATARAJA LAYOUT, 7TH PHASE, J.P.NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 078.
22. SRI.GURURAJA B.V., AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, S/O LT.VENKATARAMU B.V, RESIDING AT NO.1, 4TH A, MAIN BYRAVESWARA NAGAR, NAGARABHAVI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 072.
23. SMT. KEMPAMMA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, W/O LT BYLAPPA, RESIDING AT NO.600, 2ND CROSS, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 086.
(BY MR.V.SHIVAREDDY, HCGP FOR R1;
… RESPONDENTS MR.M.N.RAMANJANEYA GOWDA, ADV., FOR R2; MR.B.S.RAGHUPRASAD, ADV. FOR R3 TO R23) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.12.2015 (ANNEXURE – A) PASSED BY THE R1 IS ILLEGAL AND CONTRARY TO LAW AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.Jayakumar S.Patil, learned senior counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.V.Shivareddy, learned High Court Government Pleader for Respondent No.1. Sri.M.N.Ramanjaneya Gowda, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Sri.B.S.Raghuprasad, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.3 to 23.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing of impugned order dated 30.12.2015 passed by the Registrar of Societies, by which, the Registrar of Societies has directed the petitioner not to take any major decisions.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is per se without jurisdiction as the Registrar has no jurisdiction to pass such an order under the provisions of Karnataka Societies Registration Act. It is also submitted that in case the Registrar had any complaint, the same ought to have been enquired into under Section 25 of the Karnataka Societies’ Registration Act, 1960 (‘the Act’ for short).
5. On the other hand, learned High Court Govt.
Pleader is unable to point out from the records that the impugned order is preceded by any sort of enquiry.
6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsels for the parties.
7. On perusal of the provisions of Karnataka Societies Registration Act, it is evident that in case any complaint is made to the Registrar about the functioning of the Society, the Registrar is under an obligation to hold an enquiry as provided under Section 25 of the Act and cannot pass an order straight away. In the instant case, the impugned order is not preceeded by an enquiry. Therefore, the impugned order has been passed on the ground that since the Registrar has submitted report to the State Government and only the State Governement takes decision on the report submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner has been restrained from taking any major decision. The provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act does not empower the Registrar to pass such an order. The impugned order is, therefore, without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Needless to state that Respondent No.1 shall be at liberty to take an action if so advised, in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid liberty, the Petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE BNV