Non-utilization of minimum services for two of last five cooperative years mandates electoral ineligibility.

The appellants are primary milk producer co-operative societies and members of the Tumkuru District Milk Producers Co-operative Societies Union Limited (District Milk Union), a federal society.

For the 2024-2029 board elections, the District Milk Union issued notices identifying the appellants as ineligible to vote or contest under Bye-law 15.2, alleging they failed to supply the minimum 150kg of milk for at least 270 days in the preceding co-operative years.

The appellants argued that shortfalls were due to "Lumpy Skin Disease," drought, and COVID-19, and further alleged that staff had manipulated milk quality readings (SNF values).

A Single Judge dismissed their writ petitions, holding that the Election Officer need only verify the fact of supply, not the reasons for failure.

The appellants appealed, specifically challenging the interpretation of the statutory disqualification criteria.

Whether, under Section 20(2)(a-v) of the KOS Act, a member is disqualified only if they fail to utilize minimum services for consecutive years, or if failure in any two years out of the last five is sufficient.

Whether a member remains eligible if they successfully utilized services for three out of the last five years, notwithstanding failures in the other two years.

The court primarily applied Section 20(2)(a-v) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies (KOS) Act, 1959, as amended in 2021.

The rule stipulates that a member or representative shall not have the right to vote if they have "failed to utilise such minimum services or facilities... for any two co-operative years out of the last five Co-operative years".

The court contrasted this with the pre-2021 amendment version, which required a failure for "three consecutive co-operative years".

The court also noted that the disqualification period under the proviso was reduced from three years to one year by the 2021 Amendment.

The court found the language of the post-2021 Section 20(2)(a-v) to be "unambiguous".

It rejected the appellants' contention that the default must be for "consecutive" years, noting that the legislature specifically substituted the requirement of "consecutive" years with "any two co-operative years out of the last five".

Regarding the appellants' argument that supplying milk for three out of five years should preserve eligibility, the court held that the statutory test is a negative one: if the failure to utilize services occurs in "two or more" years out of five, the disqualification is triggered.

Since the appellants’ own data confirmed they failed to meet the 150kg/270-day threshold in at least two of the five years, the court determined they met the statutory criteria for ineligibility regardless of their performance in the remaining three years.

The court upheld the Single Judge's decision and the Election Officer's determination that the appellants were ineligible to vote or contest.

The Writ Appeals were dismissed, and the direction to recount votes excluding the ineligible appellants stood.