Karnataka High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Election of Director in Co-operative Society Due to Lack of Locus Standi. Non-Member of Society Cannot Challenge Election Under Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU

Admin

2026-05-18 14:58:39

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Ms. Roopa M, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 13.04.2023 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.212/2022. The Tribunal had dismissed her appeal against an order of the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Respondent No.1) dated 26.07.2022 in Dispute No. JRM/DDS/1562/2019-20, which had dismissed her challenge to the election of Respondent No.5, Sri Ramakrishna, as a director of the Mandya District Co-operative Milk Producers Societies Union Ltd. (Respondent No.3). The petitioner was a member of the Milk Producers Women Co-operative Society Ltd. (Respondent No.4), which was a member of Respondent No.3. However, the petitioner herself was not a member of Respondent No.3. The core legal issue was whether the petitioner had locus standi to challenge the election of a director of a co-operative society of which she was not a member. The court analyzed Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, which deals with disputes touching the constitution, management, or business of a co-operative society. The court held that the right to raise a dispute under Section 70 is confined to members of the society concerned. Since the petitioner was not a member of Respondent No.3, she had no locus standi to challenge the election of its director. The court also noted that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 70, but the lack of locus standi was a fundamental bar. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, upholding the orders of the Joint Registrar and the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. The decision was pronounced on 20th February 2024 by Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde.

Headnote

A) Co-operative Law - Locus Standi - Election Dispute - Non-Member - The petitioner, a member of one co-operative society, challenged the election of a director of another society of which she was not a member. The court held that a person who is not a member of a co-operative society has no locus standi to challenge the election of its directors under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. The right to challenge elections is confined to members of the society. (Paras 1-10)

B) Co-operative Law - Statutory Interpretation - Section 70 of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 - Disputes - The court interpreted Section 70, which provides for resolution of disputes touching the constitution, management, or business of a co-operative society. It held that a dispute regarding election of a director can only be raised by a member of that society, as the section uses the term 'touching the constitution' which includes election matters, but the right to raise such dispute is limited to members. (Paras 5-8)

C) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - Alternative Remedy - The court noted that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, but since the petitioner lacked locus standi, the writ petition was dismissed on that ground. (Paras 9-10)

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner, who is not a member of the respondent society, has locus standi to challenge the election of a director of that society.

Final Decision

The writ petition is dismissed. The order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal dated 13.04.2023 in Appeal No.212/2022 and the order of the Joint Registrar dated 26.07.2022 in Dispute No. JRM/DDS/1562/2019-20 are upheld.

Law Points

Locus standi
Election dispute
Co-operative society
Membership
Statutory interpretation
Writ jurisdiction

Case Details

2024 LawText (KAR) (02) 37

Writ Petition No. 9744 of 2023 (CS-RES)

2024-02-20

Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde

Sri Ashok Horanahalli, Senior Counsel a/w Sri Nischal Dev B R, Advocate for Petitioner; Sri Sidharth Babu Rao, AGA for R1 and R2; Sri B Ravindra Prasad, Advocate for R3; Sri D R Ravishankar, Senior Counsel a/w Sri Ramesha H E, Advocate for R4; Sri M R Rajagopal, Senior Counsel a/w Sri P Anand, Advocate for C/R5 and R6

Ms. Roopa M

The Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies, Mysore Region; The Additional Deputy Commissioner and Returning Officer of Mandya District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd; The Mandya District Co-operative Milk Producers Societies Union Ltd; Milk Producers Women Co-operative Society Ltd; Sri Ramakrishna; Kadlur Milk Producers Co-operative Society Ltd

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal dismissing an appeal against the dismissal of a dispute regarding election of a director of a co-operative society.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought to quash the order dated 13.04.2023 of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and confirm the dismissal order of the Joint Registrar dated 26.07.2022 in Dispute No. JRM/DDS/1562/2019-20 against Respondent No.5.

Filing Reason

Petitioner challenged the election of Respondent No.5 as a director of Respondent No.3 society, claiming that Respondent No.5 was not eligible to contest the election.

Previous Decisions

The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies dismissed the dispute filed by the petitioner on 26.07.2022. The Karnataka Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal on 13.04.2023.

Issues

Whether the petitioner has locus standi to challenge the election of a director of a co-operative society of which she is not a member. Whether the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that she was a member of a member society and thus had an interest in the election of directors of the apex society. Respondents contended that the petitioner was not a member of Respondent No.3 society and therefore lacked locus standi to challenge the election.

Ratio Decidendi

A person who is not a member of a co-operative society has no locus standi to challenge the election of its directors under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. The right to raise a dispute under Section 70 of the Act is confined to members of the society concerned.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner is not a member of the 3rd respondent society. Therefore, she has no locus standi to challenge the election of the 5th respondent as a director of the 3rd respondent society. The right to raise a dispute under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 is confined to members of the society concerned.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a dispute before the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies challenging the election of Respondent No.5 as a director of Respondent No.3. The Joint Registrar dismissed the dispute on 26.07.2022. The petitioner appealed to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, which dismissed the appeal on 13.04.2023. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka.