( 1 ) PETITIONERS 1 to 8 as well as one Karamshibhai Gordhanbhai (since deceased), represented by his heirs and legal representatives, were the members of Vanthli Seva Sahkari Mandli Limited, Vanthli, Junagadh.

( 2 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 instituted an enquiry against the petitioners under the provisions of Section 93 of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 and appointed respondent No. 2 as Enquiry Officer for the purpose of making report in respect of the charges levelled against the petitioners. The petitioners were subjected to enquiry on the ground that the petitioners gave to the members, Bonus, called "sabhasad Maal Bonus", whereby the society suffered financial loss for which the petitioners were prima facie held to be liable.

( 3 ) THE petitioners were subjected to show cause notice under the provisions of Section 93 of the Act. The petitioners denied the charges by pointing out that on the basis of the Resolution passed in the General Body, it was decided to distribute "sabhasad Maal Bonus", to all the members and, there was no intention to misappropriate or misapply any fund of the society and that the said distribution is by way of incentives under Section 66 of the Act and that the entire action is approved by the General Body in its Annual General Meeting.

( 4 ) THE Enquiry Officer, after conducting the aforeaid enquiry, submitted his report. He came to the conclusion that there is no provision in the Act or even in the byelaws to distribute bonus to the members. He also came to the conclusion that the expenditure in question is not an administrative expenditure and that there is a misapplication of the funds of the Society. The Enquiry Officer accordingly came to the conclusion that there is a loss to the Society to the extent of Rs. 50,000. 00 and accordingly, held that the petitioners are responsible to make good the aforesaid amount of RS. 50,000. 00 to the Society and that the said amount can be recovered under the provisions of the Land Revenue Code or by way of civil proceedings.

( 5 ) THE present petitioners, thereafter, carried the matter by way of appeal before the Cooperative Tribunal, challenging the aforesaid order of the Investigating Officer. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the alleged distribution of profit, though not mala fide, since it is approved by the General Body of the Society in its Annual General Meeting; yet, the same is illegal and, therefore, there is a misapplication of fund and that the finding of the Investigating Officer is legal and proper. In view of the aforesaid observation the appeal of the present petitioners was dismissed by the Tribunal. Against the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the petitioners have preferred this Special Civil Application.

( 6 ) AT the time of admitting this matter, the Court has passed the following order :-". . . . . . . . . Rule. Heard with regard to the interim relief. No affidavit in reply has been filed. It is clear from the basic finding of the Tribunal that the distribution of the profit by way of gift as particularized in the relevant Resolution of the Society and the Committee is as per the approval of the Committee as well as the annual general meeting and is not mala fide. In the face of such finding of the Tribunal, the finding that it would amount to misapplication prima facie appears to be in excess of jurisdiction of the Tribunal in dismissing the appeal in question. The Tribunal had granted interim relief to the effect that recovery should not be effected from the petitioners. Such interim relief also deserves to be granted till the petition is finally decided. Order accordingly. . . . . . . . . . . "

( 7 ) AT the time of hearing of this Special Civil Application, it was argued by Mr. J. R. Nanavati, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners, that the petitioners acted in a bona fide manner and small articles of gift were distributed amongst the members under the head of "sabhasad Maal Bonus". Mr. Nanava