The main legal point established in the judgment is that the administrator of a Co-operative Society appointed to manage the society has the necessary power to admit new members, and members admitted in contravention of the rules shall not have the right to membership or the right to vote at the election meeting or any subsequent meeting for the purpose of election.

1. Whenever elections to the committees of Cooperative Societies are to be held, several writ petitions are usually filed in this court challenging the election processes as violating the Co-operative Societies Rules. Very often the interpretation of these rules arises for determination and we have therefore thought it fit to clear at least some ground and some doubts, to settle the legal position.

2. The two questions that arise for determination in this appeal are:

(1) Whether an administrator has the power to admit new members?

(2) Who are the members entitled to participate in the election to the committee of a Co-operative Society?

3. Now to the facts of this case.

4. The term of the committee of the Koodaranhi Rural Housing Society expired in 1983. Fresh elections bad to be held. No steps were taken by the committee in office to conduct elections. There was internecine dispute between the members of the committee; and some nominated members had even tendered their resignation. In this state of affairs, in an earlier writ petition disposed of on 16th January, 1985, this Court directed that election to be Board of Directors would be held within a period of three months from that date and that the Registrar of Co-operative Societies was at liberty to appoint an administrator to manage the affairs of the society for this period. The Registrar promptly took action, appointed an administrator under S.33 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, the Act and directed him to conduct the election not later than 17-4-1985. A returning officer was also appointed.

5. What the administrator did is of some consequence. Exercising his right of management, he inducted several persons as new members to the society. The question arose whether these persons could vote at the election to be held on 17-4-1985 and the present writ petition was filed. A learned judge of this Court observed that it cannot be assumed that the returning officer would act in contravention of the statutory provisions and thus dismissed the writ petition. The learned judge did not decide whether these persons could vote at the election or not.

6. Against this decision, this appeal was filed. After issuing notice in the appeal, this court directed that the election to be conducted on 17-4-1985 should proceed, but subject to the following conditions:

(a) votes cast by the members enrolled after 16-1-1985 will be kept sealed in a separate box.

(b) the votes cast by the other members will be: kept sealed in a different box.

(c) the results of the election will be announced only after the disposal of the writ appeal.

7. This interim order is thus subject to the decision in the writ appeal. The election was held on 17-4-1985 and the returning officer has complied with the directions of this court. The question now is whether the votes cast by the members enrolled after 16-1-1985 can be counted. The results of the election have to be announced and the appeal has to decide the points in controversy, Can the administrator admit new members ?

8. The administrator in this case was appointed under S.33 of the Act when the term of the committee had expired and a new committee has not been constituted, The functions of the administrator are clearly defined in clause (2) of S.33 which reads thus:

"The committee or administrator or administrators appointed under sub-section (I) shall, subject to the control of the Registrar and to such instructions as he may from time to time give, have power to exercise all or any of the functions of the committee or of any officer of the society and take all such action as maybe required in the interests of the society."

9. The administrator functions as the managing committee of the society, in its absence. The administrator is the dejure committee in power when there is no elected committee. He has thus all the powers of the committee. It is admitted that the committee was entitled to enrol new members. If so, S.33(2) statutorily clarifies that t