Relaxation Of Voting Disqualification For Members Of 'Federal' Co-operative Societies Applies To 'Apex' Societies Too: Karnataka High Court

"Apex Societies—which by definition are Federal Societies—cannot be read as excluded from the reference to Federal Cooperative Societies in the GO," Karnataka High Court, in a significant ruling, held that a Government Order (GO) relaxing the 12-month membership requirement for voting in co-operative elections applies to 'Apex Societies' as they are, by definition, a species of 'Federal Societies'.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C.M. Poonacha observed that any attempt to restrict the benefit of such relaxation to only district-level societies would defeat the purposive intent of the state’s exemption power.

The dispute arose when several Primary Co-operative Societies (Respondents 6-67), registered less than a year before the board elections of the Karnataka Co-operative Poultry Federation Ltd (an Apex Society), sought to vote. While the Appellant argued they were disqualified under Section 20(2)(a-iii) of the KCS Act, the Societies relied on a Government Order dated May 29, 2025, which relaxed this disqualification for members of Federal Societies. After a Single Judge allowed the Societies to vote, the Appellant moved the Division Bench.

Primary Legal Question Before The Court

The primary question before the court was whether the benefit of relaxation under the GO dated May 29, 2025, issued under Section 121 of the KCS Act, extends to elections of an Apex Society. The court was also called upon to determine if the rule of ejusdem generis should be applied to interpret the term "other Federal Cooperative Societies" in a restrictive manner.

Statutory Definitions Of Apex And Federal Societies

The Court began by analyzing the statutory definitions under Section 2 of the KCS Act, noting that Section 2(e-4) defines a "Federal Society" as a co-operative society whose membership is not open to individuals. It further observed that Section 2(a) defines an "Apex Society" specifically as a "federal society whose area of operation extends to the whole of the State."

Court Notes All Apex Societies Are Federal Societies

The Bench clarified the hierarchical relationship between the two definitions, noting that while all Apex Societies are necessarily Federal Societies, all Federal Societies need not be Apex Societies. The Court found that since the GO specifically extended benefits to "Federal Cooperative Societies," excluding Apex Societies from this ambit would contradict the plain language of the Act.

"An Apex Society is also a Federal Society. Thus, the benefit of the GO would also extend to Primary Societies, which are members of an Apex Society."

Rejection Of The Rule Of Ejusdem Generis

The Appellant had contended that the expression “other Federal Cooperative Societies” in the GO should be interpreted using the rule of ejusdem generis, suggesting it only referred to district-level societies like the Milk Unions mentioned in the same clause. The Court, however, rejected this restrictive approach, citing Supreme Court precedents like Siddeshwari Cotton Mills (P) Ltd. v. Union of India.

Ejusdem Generis Cannot Whittle Down Legislative Intent

The Bench observed that the rule of ejusdem generis is merely a contextual aid and cannot be applied to undermine the clear intent of the government. The Court held that if the literal interpretation is wider and conforms to the legislative intent, the import of general words should not be artificially restricted to the preceding specific categories.

"The rule of Ejusdem Generis cannot be applied to whittle down the legislative intent."

Emphasis On Purposive Interpretation Of Statutes

Relying on the Constitution Bench decision in the Vivek Narayan Sharma (Demonetisation Case), the Court emphasized that the modern approach to interpretation is pragmatic rather than pedantic. It noted that the court must choose an interpretation that advances the purpose of the act and ensures its smooth and harmonious working rather than one that leads to absurdity.

No Rationale For Excluding Statewide Societies

The Court found no reasonable nexus or rationale for the State's subsequent clarification that attempted to exclude societies with statewide operations from the GO's benefit. The Bench noted that the State Government’s affidavit failed to provide any logic for why a Primary Society that is a direct member of an Apex Society should be treated differently from one that is a member of a District Union.

"Restricting the scope of the GO to Federal Societies that do not have a statewide operation is neither in conformity with the plain language of the GO nor with the object with which the GO was issued."

Inapplicability Of Subsequent Clarifications

The Court dismissed a communication issued by the State Co-operative Election Authority that had attempted to "clarify" that the GO was confined to district-level institutions. The Bench ruled that such a communication could not amend a GO issued under the statutory power of Section 121 of the KCS Act, especially when it was issued at a later stage and lacked a rational basis.

The Court concluded that the Appellant failed to show any grounds to interfere with the Single Judge's order. Finding that the relaxation was intended to facilitate broad participation in co-operative democracy, the Division Bench dismissed the writ appeal and all pending applications.

Date of Decision: 09 June 2026