CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES ACT v. MANGALORE - 575 003
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 19(1)(c), 43B
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 17376 OF 2023 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: TEH BAJPE VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, BAJPE, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 142, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI. VASANTHA MOGERA, S/O RAMA MUGERA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES ACT, 1959. …PETITIONER Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (BY SRI. VARUN JAYAKUMAR PATIL FOR SRI. MAHAMAD TAHIR A., ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001, REP BY ITS SECRETARY.
THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 052.
THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:7689 WP No. 17376 of 2023 MANGALURU SUB-DIVISION, K.S. RAO ROAD, KODIALBAIL, MANGALORE - 575 003. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT SECTION 129A AND SECTION 16(2)(4) AND (8) OF THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 IS ULTRA VIRES TO ARTICLE 19(1)(c), ARTICLE 43B OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner files a memo seeking permission of the Court to withdraw the petition.
2. Memo is placed on record.
Operative part
3. Petitioner is permitted to withdraw the petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- JUDGE PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 19(1)(c), 43B.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.