( 1 ) ). WHAT is challenged in these two petitions which are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, are two orders, both dated November 23, 2001 and issued by the Director (Sugar), Gujarat State, Gandhinagar, removing the petitioners as Directors of the Vadodara District Co-operative Sugarcane Growers Union Limited and Sardar Cooperative Sugar Industries Limited (the Societies for short) and appointing respondent Nos. 4 to 15 as Directors of the Societies as per bye-laws No. 21 (2) (A) and 8 (B) (1) of both the respective Societies.

( 2 ) AS both these petitions involve determination of common questions of facts and law, by the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the parties, the matters are taken up for final hearing and I propose to dispose them of by this common judgment.

( 3 ) IN order to appreciate the controversy between the parties, it would be advantageous to refer to the facts stated in Special Civil Application No. 11098 of 2001.

( 4 ) THE averments made and the grounds set out in the petition manifest that the petitioners were the Board of Directors of the Society which is registered on January 6, 1990 under the provisions of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 (the Act for short ). As per bye-law No. 21 of the Society the Board of Directors is required to be formed by 25 members including the Managing Director of the Society. In the byelaw No. 21 (2) (A), it has been specified that whatever is written in the byelaws, respondent No. 2 with the consent of respondent No. 1 shall appoint the First Board of Directors for a period of five years which can be extended by respondent No. 2 with the consent of respondent No. 1 but for a period not more than five years from the date of first crushing of sugarcane. In view of the provisions of proviso to Section 74 (C) of the Act and byelaws, respondent No. 2 with the approval of respondent No. 1 exercised powers and nominated the First Board of Directors of the Society appointing petitioner No. 1 as Chairman.

( 5 ) BECAUSE of several constraints the factory could not start the crushing of sugarcane. Therefore, respondent No. 2 vide order dated February 10, 1999, with the consent of respondent No. 1 extended the term of Board of Directors for a further period of five years from the date of commencement of crushing of sugarcane or till further orders. The Society started its crushing on November 1, 1999 and hence the term of Board of Directors had been extended for a period of five years upto October 31, 2004. It is averred by the petitioners that though the Society started functioning and was on the path of progress the petitioners apprehending that in view of change in political power there can be a political evasion against the society, passed a resolution for holding election of Board of Directors of the Society under Chapter XI-A of the Act. As per section 74-C of the Act, only the First Board of Directors is to be nominated and subsequent Board has got to be elected and therefore the society addressed a letter to the Collector, Vadodara and to respondent No. 2 for holding election under Section 74-C of the Act. It is further averred that the Collector, Vadodara informed the society by a letter dated August 7, 2001 that as the tenure of the present Board of Directors has not expired, the election cannot be held, specifically mentioning that the first Government nominated Board of the Society is still managing the affairs of the society and so before the expiry of that term, no election can be held. Respondent No. 2 also gave a similar reply by his letter dated August 23, 2001. It is specifically averred by the petitioners that the petitioners, more particularly petitioner Nos. 1, 4 and 10 are actively connected with number of institutions and had held high positions in Cooperative Societies in the past. Respondent No. 4 is a prominent worker of BJP and has just joined the party and others have been appointed on the basis of