JUDGMENT - MOHTA, J:- Quite an interesting point about certain provisions of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960 (the Act for short) as amended by Maharashtra Act No. III of 1974 is raised in the present petition. Relevant background is set out hereunder. 2. The petitioner was elected on 29.1-1978 as Chairman of the B0ard of Directors of respondent No. I a duly registered society. The Managing Director of respondent No. 1, issued a notice dated 22-1 -1980 summoning the meeting of the Board of Directors for consideration of a no confidence motion against the petitioner. This meeting was held on 29th January 1980. Out of total strength of 12 members, 11 were present, 9 voted in favour of the resolution, one against and one remained neutral. As resolution was carried and vacancy in the post of Chairman was created, programmed for the election of a new Chairman was announced on 4th February 1980 and the Connector of the District was intimated about the same. Election was scheduled to be held on 11th February 1980. The Collector directed the Sub-Divisional Officer as his deputy to remain present in the meeting. But, subsequently, on receiving a communication from the Directorate of Sugar Maharashtra State, Pune, instructions .were issued to the Sub-Divisional Officer not to attend the meet-ing, as the bye-laws of the society do not provide for moving a no confidence motion. Thus, in spite of intimation given on behalf of Society, the Collector or his Deputy remained ~absent and in his absence, meeting as scheduled was held. The third respondent Shri V. D. Patil was unanimously elected Chair-man. It is common ground that society is a “specified Society” as contemplated under section 73-G of the Act. 3. The petitioner filed an election petition bearing No.1 of 1980 under section 144-T of the Act before the Commissioner of the region. An application for grant of stay of the proceedings of the~ meeting of Board of Directors was filed but was rejected, on the ground of want of jurisdiction. Against that, Writ Petition No. 918 of 1980 was filed in this Court and vides order dated 7th April 1980; this Court was pleased to grant stay of the proceedings of the relevant meetings. However, after hearing both parties and by consent, direction was issued to the Commissioner f3r deciding the question of stay on merits. Against that, Writ Petition No. 918 of 1980 was filed in this Court and vides order dated 7th April 1980; this Court was pleased to grant stay of the proceedings of the relevant meetings. However, after hearing both parties and by consent, direction was issued to the Commissioner f3r deciding the question of stay on merits. The election petition was directed to be decided within a month and interim stay granted on 7th Apri11980 was vacated. The Commissioner thereafter heard the application on merits and granted stay on 25th April 1980. Against that order, once again, Writ Petition No. 1257 ofr1980 was filed and on 11th June 1980, this Court stayed the order of stay granted by the Commissioner on 25th April 1980, as result, the third respondent continued to act as Chairman of the Society. 4. Preliminary objection to the maintainability of the election petition before the Commissioner was raised and after hearing the parties, on With July, 1980, the learned Additional Commissioner was pleased to uphold the preliminary objections and arrived at a conclusion that section 144-T was not attracted, as dispute related to election of an officer by members of board or director of a specified society. It was further held that the petitioner's remedy lay in raising a dispute under general provisions of section 91 of the Act. Correctness and legality of this order is impugned before us. 5. In order to appreciate the respective merits of the rival contentions, it will be necessary not only to notice the Act as amended upto-date but also the various stages in which amendments were made and their background. We are chiefly concerned in the present matter with section 73-G and Chapter XI-A of the Act. It is by Maharashtra Act No. 27 of 1969 that section 73.G and Chapter XI-A were first brought on the Statute Book. By these provisions dispute regarding election of the members of the committees of the specified Societies, which was triable by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, was made subject to Chapter XI-A and was made triab]e by the Divisional Commissioner in terms of section 144-T. We may notice that in the form of section 91 the Act has made general provision for trial of any dispute by the Registrar and these provisions carved out an exception. This was followed by second Amending Act 27 of 1971 and third Amending Act No. 24 of 1972. Section 73-G as amended till then read as under: “73-G. (1) The election of the member of the committees of the societies of the categories mentioned below shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter XI-A and shall be conducted in the manner lard down by or under that Chapter.- (i) such Apex Co-operative Institutions, which the State Government may, by general or special order published in the Official Gazette, from time to time specify in this behalf, regard being had to the financial position and share capital of such institution; (ii) all District Central Co-operative Banks; (iii) all primary Land Development Banks; (iv) (a) all District Co-operative Sale and Purchase Organisations; (b) an Taluka Co-operative sale purchase organisations, (v) all Co-operative Sugar Factories; (vi) all co-operative Spinning Mills; (vii) any other societies or class of societies, which the State Government may. by generator special order published in the Official Gazette. from time to time specify in this behalf, regard being had to the financial position and share capital of such institutions. Newly added Chapter begins with section 144-A which read as under :- “l44-A (1) This Chapter shall apply only to elections to committees of societies belonging to the categories specified in section 73-G.(2) In this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, (a) “Collector” means the Collector, having jurisdiction over the local areas fit which the registered office of the society concerned is situated; (b) “ejection” means an election of a member or members of the committee of a specified society; (c) “specified society” means a society belonging to any of the categories specified in section 73-G.” Section 144-B to section 144-P provide for regulating the conduct of the elections, costs of conducting ejections, disqualifications for membership, maintenance of account of election expenses, disqualification for failure to lodge account of election expenses, removal or reduction of period of disqualification, maintenance of secrecy of voting, prohibition of canvassing in or near polling station, penalty for disorderly conduct in or near poling stat ion, penalty for misconduct hiring or procuring conveyance at elections, breaches of official duty in connection with election, etc., section 144.Q, 144-R and 144-S refer to the offences, penalties etc. 6. 6. Next relevant provision is section I44-T under which the Commissioner of the region has been given jurisdiction to try dispute regarding election covered by the chapter. This section which was amended by Act No. 36 of 1975 reads as under: “144-T. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 91 or any other provisions of this Act, any dispute relating to an election sha1l be referred to the Commissioner of the Division in which such election is held or to an officer not below the rank of Additional Commissioner of a .. Division authorised by the State Government in this behalf (hereinafter in this section-either of them as the context may require is referred to as “the specified office'). (2)”” Such reference may be made by an aggrieved party by presenting an election petition to the specified officer. Within a period of two months. from the date of declaration of the result of the election: Provided that the specified officer may admit any petition after the expiry of that period, if the petitioner satisfies the specified officer that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the petition within the said period. (3) In exercising the functions conferred on him by or under this Chapter the specified officer shall have the same powers as are vested in a C~011ftin respect of-: (a) Proof of facts by affidavit; b) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath; c) compelling discovery or the production of document; and (d) issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses. In the case of any such affidavit, an officer appointed by the specified officer in this behalf may administer the oath to the deponent. ,,, (4) Subject to any rules made by the State Government in this behalf, any such petition shall be heard and disposed of by the specified officer as expeditiously as possible. An order made by the specified officer on such petition shall be final and conclusive and shall not be called in question in any Court.” Subsequent provisions namely, 144-U to 144-X deal with the procedure of odging the petition, contents of the petition, reliefs claimed and further provide for framing of rules for the purposes of this chapter. An order made by the specified officer on such petition shall be final and conclusive and shall not be called in question in any Court.” Subsequent provisions namely, 144-U to 144-X deal with the procedure of odging the petition, contents of the petition, reliefs claimed and further provide for framing of rules for the purposes of this chapter. Division of this Court in Bhafchandra Daulatram v. K. R. Robdel, after considering the provisions of section 73-G, Chapter XI-A (as they stood then) and section!} 91 of the Act, came to the conclusion that provisions of Chapter XI-A were confined to the elections of the members of the committee and not of the officers. Term “election” used in section 144-T was construed to mean the ejection as defined under sub-section 2 (b) of section 144-A. It was further held that under the circumstances dispute- relating , to election the officer 'by the committees was triable in terms of general provisions of section 91. This full text of the judgment was not made available to us; but the substance is reported at Note No. 22 in 1974 Mh. L J. It is common ground that law as it stood then was correctly decided and the point is no more res-integra. . 8. The point raised in the petition is, however, based on subsequent amendments not only to section 73.G but also to the Chapter XI.A. These amendments were introduced by fourth Amending Act No. HI of 1974. Section 73 G of the Act was amended by adding the words “and -the officers' by the committees” in sub-section (1) and the words “and of officers” in the marginal note. Heading of Chapter Xl-A was substituted by the words “Ejection of the. Committees and Officers of certain Societies”” in” place of “Elections to certain Societies”. In section l44-A, ti1e word “Except section 144-Y, this Chapter shall apply” were substituted in place of “this chapter shall apply”. “Section 144-A (2)(a) was also amended so as to include even additional Collector and certain other officers to be appointed by the Government to perform duties of the Collector under this Chapter. In section l44-A, ti1e word “Except section 144-Y, this Chapter shall apply” were substituted in place of “this chapter shall apply”. “Section 144-A (2)(a) was also amended so as to include even additional Collector and certain other officers to be appointed by the Government to perform duties of the Collector under this Chapter. After these amendments relevant changed portions of section 73-G and section 144-A read as under:- “73-G (1) The election of the members of the committees and the officers by the committees, of the societies of the categories mentioned below shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter Xl- A and shall be conducted in the manner laid down by or under the Chapter-” “144-A. (1) except section 114- Y, this Chapter shall apply only to elections to committees of societies belonging to the categories specified in” section 73 d.” (Italicised indicates the amendments) Newly added section 144-”(reads as under:-” 144.Y. (1) This section shall apply only to election of officers by ,members of committees of societies belonging to the categories specified in section 73-G. (2) After the election of the members of the committee, or whenever such election is due the election of the officer or officers of any such society shall be held as provided in its bye-laws, but any meeting of the committee for this purpose shall be presided over by the Collector or an officer nominated by him in this behalf.” 9. On behalf of the petitioner it was contended that the only object behind amending section 73-G by Act No. III of 1974 was to bring within its sweep election of the officers by the committees also. If section 73-G as a mended is viewed in isolation, the submission does appear attractive. But, first principles of interpretation of statutes do not permit this approach. By fourth amendment, some miscellaneous changes have been made. Section 144-Y has been added in Chapter XI-A at the end and on that basis section 144-A has also been amended. Its clear significance is that Chapter XI-A shall continue to apply as before to committee elections, but section 144-Y has nothing to do with the same though placed in the Chapter. It is significant to note that even after the amendment the word “only” in section 144-A is retained and the definition of the term “election” is not changed. Its clear significance is that Chapter XI-A shall continue to apply as before to committee elections, but section 144-Y has nothing to do with the same though placed in the Chapter. It is significant to note that even after the amendment the word “only” in section 144-A is retained and the definition of the term “election” is not changed. If, therefore, all the provisions are read together, it looks plain that there bas .been no legislative intention of applying sections 144-A to section 144-X also to the elections of the officers. These provisions are applicable only to the elections to the commit-tees and that is why the term election which is specially defined for the purposes of this Chapter bas been kept untouched. It continues to refer to the election of members of the committees only as before. Easiest course for the Legislature was .,to change this definition also by including the election of officers in the same, in case it intended to do what is contended by the petitioner. The question is then what could be the object behind amending section 73-G.and in terms adding the words “and the omcers by the committees” in the same. Respondent's contention is that only intention behind these amendments was to bring Collectors' supervision over election of officers also, which hither. Before was absent in such elections, tough it was very much present in the ejection of committee in the shape of provisions in Chapter XI. It is conceded that this legislative intention could be expressed in a better and more direct method, but argument is that if intention is clear the method of expression wil1 hardly be relevant. 10. Now, intention of a Legislature is rather a slippery phrase. One bas normally to judge the intention from the plain language used. It is not permissible to. Assume particular intention first and then to put interpretation which fits in with that thinking. It is also not permissible to read only one Section or part there of statute as a whole will have to be read. None of the suggested intentions is clear; on bare combined reading of the provisions we did find some difficulty in locating the .true intention while plumbing into abysses of the mind of Legislature, and traveling on circuitous route adopted by it in the fourth amendment. 11. None of the suggested intentions is clear; on bare combined reading of the provisions we did find some difficulty in locating the .true intention while plumbing into abysses of the mind of Legislature, and traveling on circuitous route adopted by it in the fourth amendment. 11. Whenever there is a difficulty in ascertaining the legislative intention from the language used, it is necessary and permissible to examine the statement of 0 object and Reasons recorded at the time of preparation of a Bill. In Maharashtra Government Gazette, part V, 1973, at page 39(is printed the Bill dated 15th August 1973 which is introduced in the Legislative Assembly on 22nd August, 1973. Clauses 16, 31, 32, 33 and 25 of the said Bill respectively refer to the proposed amendments in section 73-Q, heading of Chapter XI-A, section 144-A and new section 144-Y. In the statement of Objects and Reasons attached to the said Bill. There are notes on all clauses. It is pertinent to note that the note with relation to aforesaid clauses is one and combined. It reads:-” Clauses 16, 31. 32, 33 and 35-A provision for elections of members of managing committees of specified Co-operative Societies under the control of the Collector has been made in section 73-G and Chapter XI A, com-plaints regarding partiality and unfair practices are also received in respect of elections of Chairman, Vice Chairman and other office bearers, by members of managing committees of these societies. It is therefore proposed that even the elections of the office bearers of these societies should be held under the control of the Collector. In view of his multifarious duties and responsibilities, it is not possible for the Collector to do the election work himself. It is, therefore, proposed to expand the definition of “Collector” in section 144-A(2)(a), with a view to empower the Additional Collector and also any officer 'not below the rank of Deputy Collector appointed by the State Government, to exercise the powers of the Collector for purposes of holding the elections. The existing disqualification laid down in section 144-E, on account of which salaried employees of societies in certain cases are debarred from being elected or for continuing as members of managing committees is being removed with retrospective effect”. 12. This note is a key to the mind of the Legislature and fully supports the view canvassed on behalf of the respondents. 12. This note is a key to the mind of the Legislature and fully supports the view canvassed on behalf of the respondents. Substance of the matter is that as far as elections of members of the Managing Committee of a Specified Society are concerned, they were being held under the control of the Collector. Complaints regarding partiality and unfair practice regarding elections of officers were received and therefore, it was necessary that even these elections should be held under the control of the Collector. Inasmuch as these elections were also brought under the supervision of the Collector, section.144-Y was introduced in Chapter XI-A. .The burden of the Collector was intended to be reduced by permitting other officers also to act as Collector. As section 144-Y was introduced in Chapter XI-A which was referred to section 73-G consequential amendments were made also in the section 73-G. Now, in case the scheme of the Act since before the fourth amendment is examined with special reference to the Collector's power to supervise the elections of the members of ,the committees, it will be seen that at almost every stage. he came in the picture. This is clear from sections 144-C to section. 144-H. But no Government control whatsoever was possible in cases of elections of officers. Only requirement was that it should be in accordance with Bye-laws Section 144-Y intended tortilla in this lacuna. It provides that the election of the “officer or officers” of any such society shall be held as provided in its Bye-laws. The provisions of this sub section (2) make it lear that other provisions of Chapter XI-A about the manner and conduct of the election do not at all apply to the election of the officers and only the bye-laws will govern the rJ same. The. Placement of the section though not conclusive of the matter is also relevant. Section 144-A to section l44-X contain the provisions regarding the manner, machinery, forum and indeed ever y aspect of the process of election from beginning to an end. Section 144-X the preceding section before section 144-Y deals with power to make rules which are necessary to be made only with relation to the election as defined under section l44-A(2)(b). We find it difficult to hold that context otherwise requires that term election should be read widely. 13. Section 144-X the preceding section before section 144-Y deals with power to make rules which are necessary to be made only with relation to the election as defined under section l44-A(2)(b). We find it difficult to hold that context otherwise requires that term election should be read widely. 13. Section 144-Y appears to be a separate class by itself and has no causal connection with other provision of the Chapter; it is an independent code in itself. This is clear not only, from the section itself but also from the fact that in section 144-A there is exception about this section. Thus, it is .apparent from the very nature of these provisions that section 144-Y is meant only for election of officers and other provisions of the Chapter cannot possibly apply to such election for which special provision is made. 14. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner chiefly relying on the 'terminology “shall be subject~ to the provisions of Chapter XI-A and shall be conducted in the manner laid down” used in section 73-G, that in the context of section 73-G, the term “election” used in Chapter XI-A should be construed in the wider sense in which it is used in section 73-G and it should be assumed r that in Chapter-A the reference was only to the conduct part of the 'election and no other. We find it extremely difficult to accept this approach, despite our definite impression that simpler and direct language was not used by the draftsman in these amendments. In our judgment, once legislative intention is located, it cannot be allowed to be lost or defeated merely because of unskilful draft. After all, reconciliation and harmonious construction is the key word” in interpretation of statute. 15. Having considered all these aspects, it seems to us that the terminology “any dispute relating to an election” used in section 144-T which alone gives jurisdiction to the Commissioner, is used in no other context excepting election of committees, as mentioned in special definition. Elections of officers clearly fall out of section 144-T and have to be held as per bye-laws and not as per other provisions of the Chapter. The only change made is that Collector showed preside over such meeting. This being our view of the matter, we upheld the ultimate decision” of the Additional Commissioner which is impugned before us. 16. Elections of officers clearly fall out of section 144-T and have to be held as per bye-laws and not as per other provisions of the Chapter. The only change made is that Collector showed preside over such meeting. This being our view of the matter, we upheld the ultimate decision” of the Additional Commissioner which is impugned before us. 16. Before concluding, we may also notice one of the points raised, namely, whether in the absence of provision in the bye-laws, there could be a valid motion for no confidence and vacancy could be considered to have been caused. We need not express any opinion at this stage on this point inasmuch this would be a subject matter of an election dispute, under section 91 of the Act. 17. The learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of hearing had brought to our notice one difficulty with which the petitioner's is faced and it is about limitation of one month presented in section 92(1)(d) for raising such dispute. According to him, petitioner may lose right to' this remedy also despite the fact that he bonafide prosecuted these remedies. We do not think that this difficulty is likely to arise under the circumstances. There is a power with the Registrar to condone the delay. The matter was not free from doubt. 1t is a different matter that subsequently, it has been discovered and that after considerable debate that the forum chosen was not proper. We envisage no better case of condo nation of delay and exercising the powers under section 92(3) than this. 24. To conclude, the petition is dismissed but under the circumstances Without any order as to costs. Needless to record that injunction granted by this Court on 30lh August, 1980, stands vacated. Petition dismissed. -----