JUDGMENT

P. K. TRIPATHY, J. : Petitioners are Plaintiffs in (C.T.) E.D.No. 13 of 2007 pending before the Orissa State Co-operative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar and Annexure-4 is a copy of that election petition. Plaintiffs filed that election dispute impleading Opposite Parties 3 and 4 of this writ petition as Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in the election petition. D.R.C.S., Balasore and A.R.C.S., Bhadrak have been added as Defendant Nos. 3 and 4. In addition to that Defendant Nos. 5 to 18 in that case are the members who are allegedly illegally elected to the Board of Directors of Padhanpada Seva Samavaya Samiti Ltd., at Nilakarai in the district of Bhadrak. None of the aforesaid Defendant Nos. 3 to 18 have been impleaded as opposite parties in this writ petition. Amongst them, Defendant Nos. 6, 8 and 10 to 18 have filed applications as intervenors and they have been permitted to participate in the proceeding.

2. There is no dispute between the parties that presently no Presiding Officer is posted as Member of the Co-operative Tribunal and a transfer or retirement vacancy exists there.

3. In the election dispute inter alia the plaintiffs stated about various irregularities in preparation of the Voter List and conducting of the election and accordingly made a prayer to declare the entire election process as illegal and to direct the defendants for a fresh election. In the Miscellaneous Appli¬cation No. 126 of 2007 filed before the Tribunal a prayer was made to direct Opposite Parties 1 and 2 and also Opposite Parties 5 to 18 (i.e. the defendants) restraining them from undertaking the further election process to elect the President on the scheduled date i.e. 31.8.2007. Petitioners accordingly approached this Court in the present writ petition on the ground of absence of the Presiding Officer obviously with a view to seek an interim protection in consonance with the prayer as noted above in the Miscellaneous Application. On 30.8.2007 in Misc. Case No. 9909 of 2007 an interim order was passed by a Division Bench of this Court in the following manner :

“Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as an interim measure, it is provided that election of the President of the Society, namely, Padhanpada Seva Samabaya Samiti Limited, Nilakarai in the district of Bhadrak, may be held but the result thereof shall not be declared without leave of this Court.”

4. The intervenors not only oppose to the aforesaid interim order and pray for vacating it but also they argue to dispose of the writ petition leaving the parties to take their chance in the election dispute case. In the above context, various contentions raised on the conduct of the individual members, their credibility and capability to participate in the election are not gone into in as much as the election dispute is pending before the Tribunal which is the forum to adjudicate such dispute on admitting and appreciating proper evidence on record. Then the question arises whether the petitioners are entitled to the interim protection as prayed for. The further question that crops up is whether the Co-operative Tribunal could have granted such interim protection as prayed for by the petitioners. Learned counsel for the intervenors argues that in view of the mandate of Section 28-B of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) the Tribunal has no such power or jurisdiction to grant stay to the election process. He further argues that the provision of Section 67-B of the Act though authorizes and empowers the Tribunal to adjudicate the election dispute Clause (ii) of Sub-section (1) does not supersedes the mandatory provisions of Section 28-B of the Act. In that regard, Mr. Sahu, learned counsel for the intervenors relies in the case of Thabir Charan Mishra versus Member, State Co-operative Tribunal, Orissa and others, 2003 (II) OLR 436, Rabindra Kumar Das and another versus State of Orissa and others, 1999 (I) OLR 497 and the case of Kailash Chandra