( 1 ) SINCE in both these petitions the facts are common and rather inter-connected, they are being dealt with together.

( 2 ) THE common facts are that one Smt. Pallaviben and one Shri Shirishbhai were the members of Maruti Cooperative Housing Society Limited (hereinafter referred to as "respondent society ). It is the case of the petitioner that the said Pallaviben and Shirishbhai (hereinafter referred to as "original members") had executed a power of attorney in favour of one Smt. Maltiben, who was looking after the affairs of Pallaviben, since Pallaviben, as per the contention of the petitioners, is residing in the USA. The original members were allotted Plot No. 6 with tenement by the society in capacity as the members of the society. The said Maltiben, who in her capacity of power of attorney holder of the original members had initially entered into an agreement somewhere in the month of January, 1988 with one Dayaljibhai N. Vaghela. However, the other members of the Society and the office-bearers were not happy with the said agreement to sell and it is the contention of the petitioners that upon the requirements of the society, on 23-1-1988 a letter was submitted in writing by Maltiben and the said Dayalji N. Vaghela that the sale-agreement for purchase of the land shall be cancelled. It is the case of the petitioners that on the basis of the said letter dated 23-1-1988, the matter was considered by the General Body of the Society and the meeting of the General Body was adjourned so as to enable Maltiben to produce the cancellation deed. It is the case of the petitioners that on 4-2-1988, the Society had given a letter to Maltiben that they have no objection if the Plot No. 6 is sold by the Original Members to Shri Gordhanbhai Naranbhai Vaghela who is the petitioner herein. It is the further case of the petitioners that on the basis of the said letter dated 4-2-1988 issued by the Society, the said Maltiben, on behalf of the Original Members, made the payment of all outstanding amount and also membership fees for the purpose of transferring the share in the name of the petitioners and the said payment was made as per the forwarding letter dated 7-2-1988 by cheque. However, nothing happened thereafter and, therefore, the petitioners addressed a letter dated 19-8-1988 to the District Registrar, Cooperative Societies, pointing out that upon the no-objection certificate, the plot is sold and the share is to be transferred. However, the Society has not taken any steps and, therefore, appropriate action may be taken against the Society under the Section 24 of the Gujarat State Cooperative Societies Act read with Rule 12 (2) of the Gujarat State Cooperative Rules (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" and "the Rules" respectively ). It appears that the District Registrar, ultimately after hearing the petitioner as well as the society passed the order on 4-2-1989, whereby in purported exercise of the power under Section 24 of the Act read with Rule 12 (2) of the Rules, he ordered the society to admit the petitioners as the members. The society carried the matter before the Additional Registrar (Appeals) by preferring a revision application No. 16/1989 and it was contended on behalf of the Society that the letter on the basis of which the case is pleaded for admission is concocted and it was also submitted that Section 24 of the Act is declared ultra virus as per the decision of this Court in the case of "amreli District Cooperative Sale and Purchase Union Ltd. and Ors. v. State of Gujarat", reported in 25 (2) GLR, 1244 and, therefore, the order of the District Registrar is illegal. The aforesaid both contentions were accepted by the Additional Registrar and the order dated 10-3-1989 was passed, whereby the revision was allowed and the order of the District Registrar was set aside. The matter was also carried by the petitioners before the State Government by preferring a revision under Section 155 of the Act. Howev