Judgment

JUDGMENT - We have heard learned counsel on both sides. Special Leave granted.

The appeal is against the judgment and order dated 24th September, 1991 of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Writ Petitions Nos. 18929-18931 of 1991. The Division Bench withdrew writ petitions to itself passed the judgment under appeal quashing the orders of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal dated 2nd August, 1991 in Appeal No. 309 of 1991 before it.

2. The controversy relates to the elections to the Committee of Management of a co-operative society called the "Bharat Silk Filature Factory and Industries Co-operative Society Ltd." (Society) Malavalli, Mandya District, which was registered on the 29th of March, 1983. Its first Board of Directors was constituted by the Government.

Appellant, T. Ramegowda, raised a dispute before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, (DRCS) Mandya in Arbitration Case No. 1 of 1991 under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (Act) seeking a direction to the Special Officer, respondent No. 5 in this appeal, to hold elections to the committee of management on the basis of the voters list existing as on 28th August, 1990 without enrolling further members. The Deputy Registrar by his order dated 3rd June, 1991 dismissed the petition against which appellant brought up an appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal operative part of which is in terms following :

"The appeal is allowed. The order of the lower authority is set aside and respondent No. 1 is hereby directed to hold election within stipulated time on the basis of the voters list existed antecedent to 17-5-91 ."

3. Necessary and material facts leading to the dispute are these :

The Society had resolved to hold elections to the Committee of Management and had issued a calendar of events of 25th August, 1990 and the elections were scheduled for 12th of September, 1990. Pursuant thereto a Voters List was announced on 28th August, 1990. But the then Managing Director of the Society appears to have decided to postpone the elections. Subsequently on 11th of September, 1990 the Managing Committee was superseded by the Government under Section 30A of the Act and a Special Officer appointed. The order of supersession was challenged by the appellant and certain other directors of the Society before the Karnataka High Court in Writ Petitions Nos. 19670-19679 of 1990. On 19th March, 1991, the High Court allowed the writ petitions and set aside the order of supersession. The order appointing the Special Officer was also quashed. The Special Officer was directed by the High Court to hold the elections to the committee of management within a period of three months and handover the charge to the newly elected committee.

But the Special Officer instead of holding the elections which obviously elections meant on the basis of the subsisting Voters List as on 19th March, 1990 started taking steps to enrol new members. He claims to have enrolled 696 members this way. It is against this action of the Special Officer that on 31st May, 1991, appellant raised a dispute before the Deputy Registrar of the Co-operative Societies seeking directions to the Special Officer to obey the mandamus issued by the High Court. The DCSR, however, dismissed the dispute even without ordering notice on it to the respondents.

4. Before the Tribunal, appellant contended that the Special Officer, after the judgment of the High Court quashing his appointment, merely continued as an authority specially authorised to conduct the elections in terms of the High Courts order. The Special Officer, it was contended, did not have all the powers under Section 30A which he would otherwise have had inasmuch as he was merely continued for the purpose of conducting the elections. In regard to the scope of his powers referable to the order of the High Court of the 19th March 1991, the Tribunal observed :

"Once his appointment is quashed and h