( 1 ) THESE nine writ petitiones raise common questions of law and are thus being decided by a single judgment. ( 2 ) FOR deciding the points raised, we may take facts from writ petition of Sheo Mangal Singh v. Registrar Co-operative societies and others ( of Ballia ), ( 3 ) SHEO Mangal Singh was a member of the general body of the U. P. State Co-operative Land Development Bank Ltd. He was also a member of the U. P. State Co-operative land Development bank Ltd. , Ballia branch, Ballia. The U. P. State Co-operative i and Development Bank Ltd. is a notified bank under the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 29 of the U. P. Co-operavite societies Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act. The terms of the Committee of Management of the U. P. State Co-operative land Development Bank Ltd. , Ballia expired on 30-6-1979. As by that time elections had not been held, an Administrator under sub-section (4) of section 29 of the Act was appointed by an order dated 1-12-1980, the Registrar directed all the District magistrates to hold elections of the delegates of the branches out of the members of the U. P. State Co-operative Land Development bank Ltd. , oh 9-2-1981 in accordance with law. The election Officer notified the election programme and the last date for filing the nomination was 1-2-1981. The Registrar, Co-operative societies stayed the election to the future date to be notified later. On 20-4-1981, the Registrar fixed 7-7-1931 as the date for the elections in pursuance of the notification issued by the district Magistrate. 25-6-81 was the date fixed for filing the nomination papers. On that date the petitioner filed his nomination for being elected as the delegate of the members of the Ballia branch of the Land Development Bank Ltd. After scrutiny the nomination papers of the petitioner was found to be ip order. No objections were filed to his nomination. However the, Registrar in exercise of the power conferred by R. 440 of the Rules allowed extension in time schedule of the Co-operative Societies and fixed 7-9-1981 as the date for Roll of the Branch and 29-7-81 for apex. No objections were filed to his nomination. However the, Registrar in exercise of the power conferred by R. 440 of the Rules allowed extension in time schedule of the Co-operative Societies and fixed 7-9-1981 as the date for Roll of the Branch and 29-7-81 for apex. In view of the change of the time schedule, the Election officer, as was required by Rule 441 displayed the following programme of election : (I) the date for display of provisional voters list.-21-8-81 (II) the date time and place for filing objections and their disposal-26-8-81 (III ) the date for display of final voters list-28-8-81 (IV ) the date time and place for 61ing nominations-31-8-81 (V ) the date, time and place for withdrawal of nominations-31-8-81 (VI) the date, time and place for allocation of election symbols and display of final nominations-3-9-81 (VII ) the date, time and place of poll-7-9-81 ( 4 ) CHALLENGING the order of the Registrar dated 8-7-1981 extending the time schedule of the election and refixing the date of poll, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. His case was that be had filed the nomination papers previously in accordance with the time schedule notified by the Election Officer and as on date of the filing of the nomination paper no other candidate had filed his nomination, the petitioner was entitled to be declared elected unopposed. The Regisrar had no power under R. 440 to allow extension in time schedule (of election) of the Co-operative societies. He could at the most only change the date of the poll and not for filing of the nomination papers. The petitioner alleged that by the extension in time schedule of the elections, the petitioner had been deprived of a right which was illegal. ( 5 ) WE have heard Sri A. Kumar and other learned counsel who appeared in support of their writ petitions as welt as Sri V. N. Khare, the Chief Standing Counsel of the State of U. P. ( 6 ) BEFORE dealing with the points raised we wish to mention some of the relevant provisions of the Act and the Rules. ( 7 ) SECTION 3 of the Act authorises the State Government to appoint a person to be the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies for the State. ( 7 ) SECTION 3 of the Act authorises the State Government to appoint a person to be the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies for the State. Sub section (3) to Section 3 entitles the State government to confer on any peron all or any of the powers of the Registrar under any provisions of this Act. ( 8 ) SECTION, 4 requires every society to be registered. Section 17 lays down the qualifications necessary to become a member of a Co-operative Society. Section 20 provides that every member of a Coperative Society shall have one vote in the affairs of the society. Section 29 (1) of the Act lays down that the management of every Co-operative Society shall vest in a committee of management constituted in accordance with this Act, the Rules and the Bye-laws, which shall exercise such powers and perform such duties as may be conferred or imposed by this Act, the Rules and the Bye-laws. Sub-section (2) provides that the term of the elected members of the Committee of Management shall be such as may be prescribed in the rules or the bye laws of the Society. Rule 445 of the rules lays down the term of the Committee of management as three Co-operative years, which expression has been defined in the Act itself. Sub-section (3) of the section 29 provides that it shall be the duty of the Committee of Management to take steps before the expiry of its term for election of members of the Committee of Management. But the proviso to sub-section (3) carves out an exception with regards to the notified societies. It provides :" that the State Government may by notification direct that in respect of such clause of Co-operative Societies as may be specified, the superintendence, direction, control and conduct of ejections of the members and Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the committee of management shall vest in the Registrar and such election may be hele otherwise than in any meeting, notwithstanding any thing contained in cl. (b) of Section 32. "sub-section (4) confers power on the Registrar to appoint an administrator for the management of the affairs of the society after the expiry of the term for which the Committee of Management is appointed. Upon his appointment as an Administrator he is required to arrange for the reconstitution of the Committee of the management in accordance with the Act. "sub-section (4) confers power on the Registrar to appoint an administrator for the management of the affairs of the society after the expiry of the term for which the Committee of Management is appointed. Upon his appointment as an Administrator he is required to arrange for the reconstitution of the Committee of the management in accordance with the Act. This has to bedone within the time specified in sub-section (6 ). By Sub section (3) Administrator, appointed by the Registrar under sab-section (4) shall, subject to any direction that the Registrar may give, have the power to perform all or any of functions of the committee Management. The explanation added to sub-section (6)of Section 29 which is material for out purposes is as follows :explanation. Notwithstanding that the process of election may have commenced before the appointment of Administrator under sub-section (4) a fresh process of election shall be commenced after such appointment. " ( 9 ) R 48-A of the Rules deals with the manner In accordance with which the general body of such class of co-operative societies as may be notified under sub-section (3) of Section 29 of the Act has to be constituted. Part IV of the Rules deals with election registered (sic) in respect of co-operative Societies notified under sub-section (3) of section 29 of the Act. Sub rule (1) of Rule 432 provided that District Magristrate of the District in which headquarters of the society is situated shall take steps to organize the election under supertedence, direction and control of the registrar. Sub-rule (2) of this Rule Provides :" the election in a co-operative society or societies or a class at clasess of the Co-operative Societies shall be held on such date or dates as the Registrar may by order fix and the District magistrate concerned shall, on such dates being so fixed appoint by order, one or more, election officers or different election officers for different class or classes of societies or for different areas for this purpose. " ( 10 ) THE two provisos to Rule 440 with which we are concerned in the present case read as under :provided that the District Magistrate of the district in which the branch/branches of the U. P. Land Development Bank Ltd. , lucknow or the sub-office of sch societies having area of operation extending to more than one revenue district is situated shall arrange the election of delegates of members to the general body of such societies on the date specified by the Registrar : provided further that the Registrar may, in special circumstances after recording reasons therefor, allow extension in time schedule of a co operative socity or class or classes of co-operative societies or of co-operative societies of any area or areas but such extension in time schedule shall be subject to the provisions of sections 29 of the Act. ( 11 ) R. 441 confers power on the election Officer to notify in the local newspapers the date or dates of election of co-operative societies falling in his jurisdiction, sub-rule (2) of Rule 441 enjoins upon the Election Officer to givve notice of not more than 30 days but not less than !5 days from the date of poll intimating the programme of election as specified in sub-rules of Rule 3 to various classes of persons and societies enumerated in para (i) to (iii) of sub-rule (2) of R. 441, Sub-rule (3) requires the. Election officer to display on the notice-board of the society the programme of election. R. 413 (1) confers wowet of declaration of the result of those persons against whom nominations do not exceed the number of persons to be elected. ( 12 ) REVVERTING to the argument, the first point submitted before us was about the validity of the notification issued under section 113 of the U. P. Co-opertive Societies Act. As noted above the Administrator had been appointed for the period of one year on July 1, 19/9. His term expired on 30th June, 1980. ( 13 ) THE elections of the delegates of Members of State co-operative Land Banches were not held. As the elections of the delegation had not taken place, the Committee of Management also could not be constituted. His term expired on 30th June, 1980. ( 13 ) THE elections of the delegates of Members of State co-operative Land Banches were not held. As the elections of the delegation had not taken place, the Committee of Management also could not be constituted. Upon the notification Under Section 113 being issued appointing a fresh Administrator the Registrar directed the District Magistrate to hold the election of the delegates of members of the various branches of the State Co-operative land Development Bank on 9-2-1981. This also did not succeed as tbe Committee of Management was not constituted before 30-6-1981, the Governor issued anothet notification on 30-6-1981 the relevant portion of this notification is quoted below : And whereas the State Government, in exercise of the powers under section 113 of the said Act made an older published in Government notification No. 1760/ifc/-C-1-Bhu. 37-76, dated September 30, 1980, directing that the provisions of sub-section (6) of Section 29 of the said Act, shall, in respect of the said bank, apply with the modification that the Administrator appointed under cl. (b) of sub-section (4) of Section 29 of the said Act, shall take action to hold election of the Board of management of the said Bank within nine months from the date of the said notification, and the said Administrator shall continue to exercise powers as Administrator of the said Bank till June 30, 1981 or till the constitution of the Board of Management of the said Bank whichever is earlier. And where as it islikly to take some more time to make preliminary preparations for holding the said elections as the General body of the said Bank is to be constituted in accordance with rule 84-A and proviso (1) to R. 440 of the Uttar Pradesh Co-operative societies Rules, 1s68. ( 14 ) AS a result of this new Administrator was appointed. About the validity of the appointment of the Administrator by the notification mentioned above, Sri. A. Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner had no objection to make. However Sri, b. Dixit woo was the counsel of another writ petition submitted that the Governor has DO power under section 113 of the Act to change the notification dated 30-6-1981. His submission was that the Act contemplates for the appointment of an Administrator under cl. (b) to subsection (4) of Section 29 only once. However Sri, b. Dixit woo was the counsel of another writ petition submitted that the Governor has DO power under section 113 of the Act to change the notification dated 30-6-1981. His submission was that the Act contemplates for the appointment of an Administrator under cl. (b) to subsection (4) of Section 29 only once. Section 29 (4) does not confer any power to make second or subsequent appointment of Administrator. He also contended that section 113 of the Act would not be utilised for a purpose which nullifies subsection (4) of Section 29 cf the Act ( 15 ) WE do not find any merit in the aforesaid submission. Section 113 confers power on the State Government to exempt any co-operative society from any of the provisions of the Act and it is further empowered to direct that such provisions shall apply to such society with such modifications as may be prescribed. Under this section, therefore, the State Government had power to modify the povisions of the Act and to apply the same to a society with those modifications, The term " modification" implies an alteration and the word is equally applicable whether the effect of the alteration is to narrow or enlarge the provisions. " see Western India Theatres v. Municipal Corporation, Poona, air 1959 SC 586 . According to our view Section 113 has a very wide scope. This confers power on the State Government to appoint an Administrator with the requirement to arrange for the constitution of a Committee of Management within one year. By this notification, the State Government has empowered the Administrator to hold election of the Board of Management of the bank within 9 months. The Administrator of the said Bank till 30-6-1981 or till the constitution of the Board of Management of the said Bank, whichever is earlier. There is nothing in the Act which prohibits or conflicts with the impugned notification dated 30-6-1981 issued by the State Government. In case such an interpretation is not accepted. conclusion ( confusion? ) might arise when there would be nobody to administer the co operative society. On the interpretation of Sri. B. Dixit being accepted, a curious situation might arise which could have never been intended by the state Legislature, hence we are not prepared to accept the argument of Sri. B. Dixit. ( 16 ) SRI. conclusion ( confusion? ) might arise when there would be nobody to administer the co operative society. On the interpretation of Sri. B. Dixit being accepted, a curious situation might arise which could have never been intended by the state Legislature, hence we are not prepared to accept the argument of Sri. B. Dixit. ( 16 ) SRI. A. Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner urged that under the proviso to Rule 440, the Registrar had no power to change the entire schedule. He could Only change the date of the poll and not the date for filing nominations. Uuder sub-rule (0 of Rule 439 the election is to be organized under the suprintendence, direction and control of the registrar. The power conferred on the Registrar is of a very wide nature, Sub-rule (2) of Rule 439 says that the election in a co-operative society shall be held on such date or dates as the Registrar may by order fix. Taking these two provisions together, we find that the Registrar has ample authority under these rules to not only change the date of the poll but also to lay down the manner in accordance with which the elections have to take place The experssion "control "has to be given a wide meaning so that it achieves the purpose for which the power had been conferred upon the Registrar. The Registrar is overall in charge of the Co-operative Societies. This was the reason that sub-rale (1) of R. 439 provides that election of a Co-operative society would be held under the superintendence direction and control of the Registrar. . ( 17 ) SUB-RULE (2) further shows that the election of the Co-operative society shall be held on such date or dates as the registrar may by order fix. The expression " election " has been used in this sub-rule of Rule 439 in the wide sense, that is to say to cannot the entire procedure to be gone through to return a condidate. It covers the whole procedure whereby an elected member is returned whether or not it be found necessary to take a poll. Doubtles, in its ordinary meaning it emplies some act of choosing. But this term has not been used in the narrow sense. It covers the whole procedure whereby an elected member is returned whether or not it be found necessary to take a poll. Doubtles, in its ordinary meaning it emplies some act of choosing. But this term has not been used in the narrow sense. Considering the context and the background, to us, it appears that the word " election " used in this rule bears the wide meaning referring to the entire process wnich consists of several stage and embraces many steps. ( 18 ) WE are now required to deal with the second proviso to rule 440, on the basis of which, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Registrar could only extend the date of the poll and not other dates which had been fixed by the election Officer. ( 19 ) WE are unable to find any merit in this submission. The proviso empowers the Registrarar to allow extension in time schedule. A time schedule of an election does not only consist of the poll. It requires many other things to be done to hold an election to be mentioned therein. It was wrong to suggest that the power of extension granted by Proviso could be exercised by the registrar only for changing the date of the poll and not of the entire schedule proceding it. The power conferred is for extension of the time schedule. The time schedule does not only talk of the poll. It implies within hself the entire process commencing from the date of filing of the nomination paper to the date of the final election. The expression " extension" has been deliberately used to bring within its hold the lengthening out of time previously fixed for holding of the elections. This expression lends itself to variety of meanings which must in each case be gathered from the context. It means enlarge than the original limit. As already observed above if the power conferred by the Proviso is interpreted in the context, one would lead to the conclusion that a restricted meaning, if given, is likely to defeat the object and purpose for which the power has been conferred on the Registrar. It means enlarge than the original limit. As already observed above if the power conferred by the Proviso is interpreted in the context, one would lead to the conclusion that a restricted meaning, if given, is likely to defeat the object and purpose for which the power has been conferred on the Registrar. The only restriction placed is that the time schedule fixed should not travel beyond the period for which the Administrator has been appointed under section 29 ( 20 ) IN the instant case, the Registrar had fixed two dates; (1)tor the holding of the elections of the Branches of the U. P. State co-operative Land Development Bank Limitted, and (2) for the constitution of the Committees of Management of the peak body, that is, the U. P. State Co-operative Land Development Bank limited. These dates were 7 9 `1981 and 2-9-1981 respectively After having fixed these two dates, the rest of the details were required to be arranged by the Election Officer. Such a direction, we have already held above, could be rightfully given by the Registrar in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by Rule 439. That rule provides for holding of the elections under the supervision and control of the Registrar. In exercise of this power the Registrar has stated in the impugned notification that the elections had to take place de novo ( 21 ) IN pursuance of the power conferred on the Election officer by Rule 443, the scheme was changed and a new date for filing of nomination papers was notified. The Election Officer was fully justified in doing so. ( 22 ) THE counsel next urged that the power of extension in time schedule of a co-operative society could be exercised by the registrar only in special circumstances after recording reasons therefor, and since in the instant case the Registrar failed to point out special circumstances the extension was Invalid. In the impugned order we find the reasons stated by the Registrar for extension in time schedule. These reasons were. (I) excessive rains which obstructed the voters from participating at the elections of the branches; (II) declaration of result of the candidates against sub-rule. (1)of Rule 443: (III) for preparing a voters list afresh which may include those who were enrolled recently; (IV) for finding out those who were disqualified. These reasons were. (I) excessive rains which obstructed the voters from participating at the elections of the branches; (II) declaration of result of the candidates against sub-rule. (1)of Rule 443: (III) for preparing a voters list afresh which may include those who were enrolled recently; (IV) for finding out those who were disqualified. ( 23 ) THE question is whetherthese reasons could be considered as epecial circumstances. Existence of special circumstances is a condition precedent for exercise of power by a Registrar under the said proviso. Unless there are special circumstancestime schedule of an election cannot be postponed. The words " special circumstances " are wide, compre hensive and flexible and we think that the tule making authority intended them to be so and no court can or ought to lay down any exhaustive definition of these. Circumstances which may be special in one case, in another would not be such. The circumstances stated as special in an order of the registrar have to be considered as a whole. If they are taken piecement it would be easy to find that each separate element is insufficient by itself and to conclude therefore that the sum total must also be insufficient. But a factor which, standing alone would be insufficient may have altogether a different value when found in combination with some other factor or factors. ( 24 ) IN this case we find that the circumstances mentioned were relevant for the purpose for which the power of postponement of the time schedule had been ordered. Each one of the circumstances taken individually and jointly aim at achieving the object of a broad-based election assimilating as many members as possible. ( 25 ) WE wish to cote that as the special circumstances were relevant to the exercise of power we cannot hold that the postponement of the election is in contravention of the law. As to what is special circumstance is to be decided by the Registrar and not by this court. Had the reasons given been throughly irrelevant, tt could have been different. This is not so in the present case. Since proper and adequate reasons were given there can be no complaint. ( 26 ) IN the instant case the direction bad been issued by the Registrar for holding of the election afresh. In pursuance of that direction that the Election Officer notified fresh dates. This is not so in the present case. Since proper and adequate reasons were given there can be no complaint. ( 26 ) IN the instant case the direction bad been issued by the Registrar for holding of the election afresh. In pursuance of that direction that the Election Officer notified fresh dates. The display 00 the notice-board of the Society of the changed programme of the election was not invalid being in accordance with Rule 443. ( 27 ) FOR the reasons given above, we do not find any merit in these petitions which are dismissed under the proviso to Rule 2 of Chapter XXI of the Rules of the Court. .