MAHARUDRAPPA SIRSE Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition no. 27268 of 1998, dated 23-11-1998 directing the Administrator-respondent 3 to hold the elections to the Managing Committee of S. N. Education Society within 3 months from the date of the order and thereafter hand over the administration to the elected body.

(2.) THE appellant, who is a social worker, member and Ex. President of 3rd respondent-Society questioned the appointment of the Administrator-respondent 3 for a period of 6 months from 13-5-1998 before the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 27268 of 1998 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. He alleged that there are 51 life members in the said society including himself. Though the affairs of the Society were running smoothly, at the instance of one of the members of the Society, who was not elected to the Managing Committee and due to political pressure, an order of appointing an Administrator was passed on 4-10-1996 and charge was taken by him on 5-10-1996. The said appointment was being extended from time to time at the request of the Administrator and he was continued by an order dated 7-5-1997. Subsequently, the period of appointment was further extended by 6 months on 12-11-1997 and finally for another 6 months by an order dated 13-5-1998 with effect from 5-4-1998. Though the said period has expired by 4-10-1998, no elections were held by him. Appellant, therefore, filed the writ petition seeking for quashing the impugned order dated 13-5-1998 passed by respondent 1 by issue of writ of certiorari and for a direction to respondent not to enrol new members and to hold election by issue of a writ of mandamus. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition giving a direction to 3rd respondent-Administrator to hold the election to the Managing committee of the Society within 3 months and thereafter to hand over the administration to the elected body. Since the learned Single Judge has not given direction to the respondent 1 not to enrol new members, the petitioner filed the present appeal.

(3.) WE have heard the arguments of the learned Counsel appearing on both sides.