ORDER : M.G.UMA, J. In W.P.No.2043/2025, the petitioners have sought for quashing the ineligible voters list dated 21.01.2025 issued by respondent No.4 produced as per Annexure - A and also direct respondent Nos.4 and 5 to include their names in the eligible voters list, permit them to contest and vote in the election to the Committee of management of respondent No.4, that was scheduled on 09.02.2025. 2. In W.P.No.2551/2025, the petitioners have sought for writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 to 5 to include the names of the petitioners in the eligible voters list, who are now in the ineligible voters list as per Annexure -A and permit them to cast their votes in the elections to respondent No.5 that was scheduled on 09.02.2025. 3. In W.P.No.2833/ 2025, the petitioners have sought for quashing the ineligible voters list dated 21.01.2025 issued by respondent No.4 produced as per Annexure - A and also direct respondent Nos.4 and 5 to include their names in the eligible voters list, permit them to vote in the election to the Committee of management of respondent No.4, that was scheduled on 09.02.2025. 4. In W.P.No.3170/2025, the petitioners have sought for writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 to 5 to include the names of the petitioners in the eligible voters list and permit the petitioners to vote in the elections to respondent No.4 that was scheduled on 09.02.2025. 5. In W.P.No.3536/2025, the petitioners have sought for writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to 5 to include the name of the petitioners in the eligible voters list, who are now in the ineligible voters list as per Annexure A and permit the petitioners to vote in the elections to respondent No.5, that was scheduled on 09.02.2025. 6. 5. In W.P.No.3536/2025, the petitioners have sought for writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to 5 to include the name of the petitioners in the eligible voters list, who are now in the ineligible voters list as per Annexure A and permit the petitioners to vote in the elections to respondent No.5, that was scheduled on 09.02.2025. 6. Heard Sri Mahesh R Uppin, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.Nos.2043/2025 and 2833 of 2025, Sri M R Rajgopal, learned senior advocate for Sri Vinaya Keerthi M, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.Nos.2551/2025 and 3536/2025, Sri Rahul S Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.3170/2025, Sri Yogesh D Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents - State, Sri A Devaraj, learned standing counsel for Election Authority, Sri A V Nishanth, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5 in W.P.Nos.2043/2025, 2551/2025 and 2833/2025 respectively, Sri Akash Patil, learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 to 10 in W.P.Nos.2043/2025, 3170/2025, Sri Shivaram R Bhat, learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 to 10 in W.P.Nos.2551/2025 and 2833/2025 and Sri Varun J Patil, learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 to 10 in W.P.Nos.3536/2025. Perused the materials on record. 7. As per the interim order, the Returning Officer was directed to permit the petitioners to cast vote in the election that was scheduled on 09.02.2025 and keep the vote cast by the petitioners separately in a sealed cover, which shall be subject to the further orders by this Court. Accordingly, the petitioners have already cast their votes in the election. 8. The dispute regarding the inclusion of the names of the petitioners in the ineligible voters list could be raised by the petitioners before the Registrar invoking Section 70 of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act (for short 'the KCS Act'). Under such circumstances, I do not find any reason to bypass the statutory remedy available under Section 70 of the KCS Act and to entertain these petitions. 9. Hence, the petitions are disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to invoke Section 70 of the KCS Act and raise the dispute in accordance with law, if they are advised to do so. 10. The Returning Officer is directed to announce the result without counting the votes cast by the petitioners. 9. Hence, the petitions are disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to invoke Section 70 of the KCS Act and raise the dispute in accordance with law, if they are advised to do so. 10. The Returning Officer is directed to announce the result without counting the votes cast by the petitioners. He is directed to keep the votes cast by the petitioners separately, which shall be subject to the final result of the dispute that may be raised by the petitioners.