<p>Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has held that Rule 13D of the Karnataka Cooperative Society Rules requires only publishing of the list of ineligible voting members and no eligible voting member has a right to seek for the list of other eligible voting members. </p><p>Justice Suraj Govindaraj said this while dismissing the petition filed by four directors from various cooperative societies in Tumakuru district.</p><p>The petitioners HM Vishwanath, Umesh Rupesh HS and YS Nanje Gowda had sought direction to the District Election Officer to provide them both eligible and ineligible voter lists from primary credit, agriculture credit, and women self-help group cooperative societies in the district. </p> .Karnataka High Court orders notice to Union, state govts on PIL challenging nod for tourism project at Roerich estate.<p>The petitioners stated that the District Election Officer (Deputy Commissioner of Tumakuru), failed to provide the list.</p> .<p>During the hearing, the court was informed that the authorities had complied with Rule 13D by displaying the ineligible voters list on the society's notice board. </p><p>This list was also published in newspapers and individual notices were sent to ineligible members, following the prescribed procedure, the advocate stated.</p><p>Justice Suraj Govindaraj noted that the petitioners are eligible voters and/or whose names are not found in the ineligible voters list. </p><p>“Secondly, there is no separate list which is prepared by the Society or the Electoral Officers as regards eligible voters and ineligible voters; only one list is prepared as regards ineligible voters, at this stage, it is only at the time of the election that the Electoral Roll is prepared of the eligible voters,” the court said.</p> .<p>The court further stated that persons in the ineligible voters list have their own remedy in terms of the procedure provided under Rule 13D and it is not for the petitioners to espouse their cause. </p><p>Negating the submission that the petitioners would require the list of eligible voters to plan their campaign for the elections, the court said they could always verify the members of the society and, being aware of who the ineligible voters are, they can plan their campaign as regards the other members whose names are not found in the ineligible list.</p>
<p>Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has held that Rule 13D of the Karnataka Cooperative Society Rules requires only publishing of the list of ineligible voting members and no eligible voting member has a right to seek for the list of other eligible voting members. </p><p>Justice Suraj Govindaraj said this while dismissing the petition filed by four directors from various cooperative societies in Tumakuru district.</p><p>The petitioners HM Vishwanath, Umesh Rupesh HS and YS Nanje Gowda had sought direction to the District Election Officer to provide them both eligible and ineligible voter lists from primary credit, agriculture credit, and women self-help group cooperative societies in the district. </p> .Karnataka High Court orders notice to Union, state govts on PIL challenging nod for tourism project at Roerich estate.<p>The petitioners stated that the District Election Officer (Deputy Commissioner of Tumakuru), failed to provide the list.</p> .<p>During the hearing, the court was informed that the authorities had complied with Rule 13D by displaying the ineligible voters list on the society's notice board. </p><p>This list was also published in newspapers and individual notices were sent to ineligible members, following the prescribed procedure, the advocate stated.</p><p>Justice Suraj Govindaraj noted that the petitioners are eligible voters and/or whose names are not found in the ineligible voters list. </p><p>“Secondly, there is no separate list which is prepared by the Society or the Electoral Officers as regards eligible voters and ineligible voters; only one list is prepared as regards ineligible voters, at this stage, it is only at the time of the election that the Electoral Roll is prepared of the eligible voters,” the court said.</p> .<p>The court further stated that persons in the ineligible voters list have their own remedy in terms of the procedure provided under Rule 13D and it is not for the petitioners to espouse their cause. </p><p>Negating the submission that the petitioners would require the list of eligible voters to plan their campaign for the elections, the court said they could always verify the members of the society and, being aware of who the ineligible voters are, they can plan their campaign as regards the other members whose names are not found in the ineligible list.</p>