SRI. GANGULA REDDY. G v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Case at a glance
- Bench
- R NATARA
- Neutral citation
- 2025:KHC:29574
Outcome
Dismissed
Hence, the writ petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 s. 70
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 22426 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. GANGULA REDDY. G, S/O LATE GORA CHINNAPPA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, WORKING AS PURCHASE SUPERINTENDENT, PROCUREMENT AND INPUT DIVISION, CENTRAL OFFICE, KOLAR DISTRICT MILK PRODUCERS SOCIETIES UNION LTD KOLAR, BELAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, HUTHURU POST AND HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT 563102. (BY SRI. B V ANAND, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR.B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001
THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, (INDUSTRIES AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY ) OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA …PETITIONER - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:29574 WP No. 22426 of 2025 HC-KAR NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, BENGALURU 560002. REG UNDER CO-OP SOCIETIES ACT 1956.
THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (INDUSTRIES AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY) OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES NO.1 ALI ASKAR ROAD, BENGALURU 560 002 REG UNDER CO-OP SOCIETIES ACT 1956.
KOLAR DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS SOCIETIES UNION LTD., BENGANAHALLI VILLAGE, HUTHURU POST, HUTHURU HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT 563102. REG UNDER CO-OP SOCIETIES ACT 1956.
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KOLAR MILK UNION LIMITED BENGANAHALLI VILLAGE, HUTHURU POST, HUTHURU HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT 563102 REG UNDER CO-OP SOCIETIES ACT 1956. (BY SRI.HARISHA.A.S, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION OF THE PETITIONER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE -C DATED 30.05.2025 BEARING NO. KOHAO ADDALITHA/1067/2025-26 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5 GRANT INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION AND EXECUTION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF SUSPENSION OF THE PETITIONER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE -C - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:29574 WP No. 22426 of 2025 HC-KAR DATED 30.05.2025 BEARING NO. KOHAO ADDALITHA/1067/2025-26 PASSED BY THE R5 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged an order passed by the respondent No.5 suspending him from service in terms of the order bearing No. KOHAO: Addalitha::1067: 2025-26 dated
30.05.2025.
2. It appears that the petitioner was the purchase superintendent under the procurement and input division of the Kolar District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited, Kolar. It appears that due to some misconduct alleged by the respondent No.5 he was suspended from service. The petitioner has challenged his suspension in this petition.
Operative part
3. The suspension of the petitioner from service does not involve any element of public law or violation of any fundamental right and the respondent is neither a State or an instrumentality of the State, for this Court to exercise - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:29574 WP No. 22426 of 2025 HC-KAR jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the petitioner is bound to avail the alternate remedy provided under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.
4. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority in accordance with law.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate permitted to file a memo of appearance for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 within 10 days. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, the writ petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 — s. 70.
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.