JUDGMENT

Lakshmi Prasad, J. - This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner was appointed as Manager of Zilla Sahkari Bank limited, Unnao, on 8th October, 1963. Later on he was confirmed as such on 29th June, 1967. The Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 has been repealed and replaced by the U. P. Co- operative Societies Act (11 of 1966). Section 31 of U.P. Act t 11 of 1966) provides for the appointment of a secretary. It says that there shall be a secretary of every co-operative society, to be appointed and removable by the society subject to the pro- visions of the rules and the regulations framed under sections 121 and 122. Section 131 of the said Act provides that any co-operative society registered under the Co- operative Societies Act, 1912 or under any other law relating to co-operative societies in force in the State of Uttar Pradesh shall be deemed to be registered under this Act, and its bye-laws shall, so far as the same are not inconsistent with the express provisions of this Act, continue in force until altered or rescinded according to the provisions of this Act. It further says that every co-operative society covered by sub-section (1) shall, within a period of one year from the date of coming into force of the Act, delete or amend such bye-laws as are inconsistent with the pro- visions of this Act and the Rules and shall make such further bye-laws as may be necessary having regard to the provisions of this Act and the Rules. On 5th February, 1968, Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1968 was promulgated. By section 2 of the said Order the following is added as sub- section (10) to section 131 of the Act :

"(10) For so long as a Secretary is not appointed by a Society, in accordance with sub- section (1) of section 31 of this Act

(a) where there is an officer already appointed by the Society, under its existing bye-laws to work as its Chief Executive Officer, whether designated as General Manager or Manager or by any other name, such officer shall be deemed to be the Secretary of the Society appointed in accordance with sub-section (1) of section 31 of this Act, and

(b).............................................

2. The contention of the petitioner is that in view of the above noted provision of the Act as introduced by the Order he is to be deemed to be the Secretary of the Bank as envisaged by sub-section (1) of section 31 of the Act of 1966. His gravamen is that the Administrator, opposite party No. 1 who came to be appointed on supersession of the Board of Directors, prevents him from working as Secretary of the Bank. Accordingly the prayer in the petition is that the opposite parties, namely, the Administrator, Zilla Sahkari Bank Ltd., Unnao, the District Magistrate Unnao and Zilla Sahkari Bank Ltd., Unnao, through its Administrator, be directed to treat the petitioner as Secretary of the Bank and not to appoint any one as the Secretary of the Bank.

3. The petition is opposed by opposite parties 1 and 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf.

4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Chief Standing Council appearing for opposite parties 1 and 3. In view of clause (a) of sub-section (10) of section 131 of the Act as inserted by the Order of 1968 it is abundantly clear that an officer already appointed by the Society under its existing bye-laws to work as Chief Executive Officer, no matter what is his designation, is to be deemed to be the Secretary of the Society appointed in accordance with sub-section (1) of section 31 of the Act. It is also not in controversy that the petitioner was appointed Manager of the Bank, a registered society, on 8th October, 1963 and was subsequently confirm- ed on 29th June, 1967. The contention of the petitioner is that having regard to what is provided by bye-law No. 71 of the bye-laws, a copy of which is filed as Annexure I to the petition, it must be held that he was appointed by the