If 33% members table no-trust move, no need to assign any reason, says Dharwad bench of Karnataka high court

BENGALURU: If a minimum of one-third of members of a co-operative society move a no-confidence motion, then they need not assign any reason for it, the Dharwad bench of Karnataka HC has held in a order.
Dismissing the petition filed by Nasiruddin Bhagwan, Justice MI Arun has noted that if the registrar is satisfied that the no-confidence motion is moved by the requisite number of members, he has to give 15 days' notice to all members, including the person against whom the motion is moved.
"That gives sufficient time for a person to approach the board members and know who are against him and he can convince them to the contrary, if he so desires," the judge has noted in his order. Nasiruddin was serving as president of Shree Malaprabha Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane, Belagavi. After nine-members moved a no-confidence motion against him, a notice was issued to him in March 2023.
Challenging the notice, Nasiruddin argued that the registrar had taken more than seven days to authorize an officer for presiding over the board meeting called to consider the no-trust motion against him. He claimed that the authorized officer has given him only a notice of the meeting of no-confidence motion and the written notice signed by not less than a third of the members along with a copy of the proposed motion given by them to the chief executive of the society, has not been provided to him.
None of the rights of petitioner violated: Court
Justice Arun, after studying materials on record and the explanation contained under rule 14 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960, has pointed out that none of the rights of petitioner has been violated.
The judge has noted that delay in authorization within seven days does not violate the right of the person against whom the no-confidence motion is moved. "The fact that the petitioner has made only those who have moved the motion against him as respondents in the instant case and not other directors, shows the petitioner is aware as to who are against him," the judge has further said, rejecting the petition.