JUDGMENT : PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J. 1. Writ Petition No.107959/2024 is filed by the petitioners seeking a writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.3 to 5 to include the name of the petitioners in the final eligible/borrower voters list and permit them to cast vote in the 5 th respondent-Society scheduled to be held on 28.12.2024 and for other consequential orders. 2. Writ Petition No.107823/2024 is filed by the petitioners seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the final ineligible voters list issued by respondent No.4 and mandamus directing respondents to conduct elections to the 7 th respondent society scheduled to be held on 28.12.2024. 3. The petitioners are duly admitted members/borrowers members of the 5 th and 7 th respondent-Societies registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to ‘the Act’, for short) in order to combat indebtedness and to empower citizens in the rural sector. 4. The District Election Officer declared the election to the 5 th and 7 th respondent-Societies pursuant to which calendar of events were issued by the Returning Officer dated 20.11.2024. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Returning Officer as well as the 5 th and 7 th respondents, respectively in both cases, have not followed the procedure contemplated under the Act in preparation of the draft voters list and in the matter of issuing notices to attend the meeting of the society and not providing information to defaulters of the society. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondents conducted the process of election in violation to the mandatory provisions of Rule 13-D(2-A) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 . It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that having violated the provisions of the Act and the Rules, a direction be issued to respondent No.5 and respondent No.7, in the respective case, to include the names of the petitioners in the final voters list. They contend that the right to form a co-operative society is a constitutional right and for the members to contest and cast their vote is a statutory right provided. It is further contended that respondents-Societies have not issues or served the General Body Meeting notice to the petitioners, the date of the meeting and hence they were unable to attend the General Body Meeting. It is further contended that respondents-Societies have not issues or served the General Body Meeting notice to the petitioners, the date of the meeting and hence they were unable to attend the General Body Meeting. Therefore, non-attendance of the meeting leading to disqualification of the petitioners to vote for the election cannot amount to violation of the Rules and regulations of the Societies. It is further contended that the Societies have disqualified the petitioners for not attending the meeting and also for having been defaulters in the Society. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court seeking direction to include their names in the final eligible voters list for participation in the election scheduled to be conducted by the Societies. 5. Per contra, learned counsel representing the State and other respondents contend that the action of 5 th and 7th respondents do not call for interference, as final eligible voters list and non-eligible voters list have been published prior to calendar of events. On these grounds, they seek dismissal of the petition. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. 7. This Court vide order dated 27.12.2024 and 24.12.2024 permitted the petitioners to cast their vote based on which the petitioners have cast their vote and same ae kept in a separate box and it is submitted that the elections is also over. 8. Learned counsel for the Society contends that six months is already over and the elected bodies have not been declared in view of the pendency of this petition and due to interference by the petitioners in the election process. It is further contended that now the election has been conducted and the petitioners have participated in the election, it would be in the interest of the petitioners as well the respondents to declare the results including the vote cast by the petitioners and if any person is aggrieved by the result of the election, they would be at liberty to challenge the same in the manner known to law before the appropriate forum. I am in agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents that since the petitioners were permitted to cast their vote, if the election results are announced which are not seriously objected by respondent No.5 and respondent No.7, in the respective petition, the petitioners-societies can proceed further in its day to day activities. 9. Learned counsel for both parties rely upon the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 8502/2022 along with Writ Petition No. 8477/2022 , dated 07.06.2022 which is applicable to the present petitions. Therefore, the Returning Officer is directed to announce the results forthwith including that of the petitioners kept in a separate ballot box. If any party is aggrieved by the out come of the result, he/they is/are at liberty to approach the appropriate authority for redressal of his/their grievances in accordance with law. 10. Under the circumstances, I pass the following order: i. Petitions are disposed of. ii. The results of the election shall be declared and announced taking into consideration the vote cast by the petitioners. If any of the parties are aggrieved by the result of the election, they are at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law.