J. S. VERMA, J. ( 1 ) THIS order shall also dispose of Misc. Petition No. 1133/82,1146/82,1148/82, 1163/82, 1213/82, 1246/82, 1258/82, 1278/82, 1292/82,1306/82, 1310/82, 1322/82 and 1340/82, which involve the same points on the same facts. ( 2 ) PETITIONER No. 1 is a non-credit primary society. Its committee, as defined in Section 2 (d) of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, was constituted under Section 48 of the Act by election held in July 1979. The committee's term of three years, as laid down in subsection (7-A) of Section 49 of the Act was to expire in July 1982. However, the State government, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (7-AA)of Section 49 of the Act extended the term of the committee and delegate elected under clause (9) of sub-section (1) of Section 49, of all classes of societies till 31st August 1982 by two notifications dated 14-1-1982 and 20-2-1982, published in the M. P. Gazette (Extra-ordinary) dated 144-1982 and 23-2-1982 respectively. No grievance was made by the petitioner-society or any other person to the extension of term beyond its term of three years. No election to constitute a fresh committee under sub-section (1) of Section 49 of the Act was held till 31st August 1982, in respect of the petitioner-society or any other society in relation to which the other petitions have been filed. An order dated 1-9-1982 (Annexure F) was passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jabalpur, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) of Section 49 of the act, exercising powers of the Registrar thereunder, assuming charge of the committee until further orders or till constitution of the new committee after elections. Similar orders under Section 49 (8) dated 1-9-1982 have been passed in respect of all the societies in relation to which the aforesaid other petitions have been filed. It may a1so be mentioned that all the societies with which we are concerned in these petitions are non credit primary societies. It is this order dated 1-9-1982, made under sub-section (8)of Section 49 of the Act, which is challenged in all these petitions. ( 3 ) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioners in all these cases were heard together and their common arguments as well as the reply of the learned Advocate-General on behalf of the State, are considered hereafter. It is this order dated 1-9-1982, made under sub-section (8)of Section 49 of the Act, which is challenged in all these petitions. ( 3 ) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioners in all these cases were heard together and their common arguments as well as the reply of the learned Advocate-General on behalf of the State, are considered hereafter. The contentions urged in support of these petitions are as under t (1) Sub-section (8) of Section 49 of the M. P. Co-operative Societies act, 1960, contravenes Article 14 and 19 (1) (c) of the Constitution as it confers arbitrary powers on the Registrar to take over charge from the Committee without even giving a prior notice. It is also alleged to be in conflict with Rule 43 (2) of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1962, which enables the committee to continue in office until another committee is duly constituted. Absence of any procedure to decide default of the society to attract Section 49 (8) is also relied on to support this ground. (2) Assuming sub-section (8) of Section 49 to be valid, it is attracted in the event of the committee's default committed by the existing committee, the condition precedent for exercise of power under this provision was absent. (3) On the above basis, it was contended that the impugned order dated 1-9-1982 passed under sub-section (8) of Section 49 is invalid and, therefore, charge be restored to the committee existing at the time of that order and direction be given to the respondents to hold elections for constituting a fresh committee as early as possible. ( 4 ) IN reply, the learned Advocate-General submitted at the very outset that steps have been commenced on 15-10-1982 for holding elections to constitute the fresh committees and the programme for holding the elections has been filed along with an affidavit to show that the elections are being held for constitution fresh committeees as early as possible. The learned advocate-General also stated that fresh elections to constitute committees of the non-credit primary societies, to which category all these petitions relate, are likely to be over by the end of December 1982, i. e. within a period of 21/2 months from commencement of the election process on 15-10-1982. The learned advocate-General also stated that fresh elections to constitute committees of the non-credit primary societies, to which category all these petitions relate, are likely to be over by the end of December 1982, i. e. within a period of 21/2 months from commencement of the election process on 15-10-1982. The learned Advocate-General contended that for this reason alone, no interference in these petitions is called for, even assuming that the construction placed On sub-secllon (8) of Section 49 of the Act on behalf of the petitioners be correct. The learned Advocate-General, however, contended that there is no invalidity attached to sub-section (8) of Section 49 and, therefore, the primary contention be rejected. ( 5 ) IN our opinion, sub-section (8) of Section 49 does not suffer from any invalidity as claimed on behalf of the petitioners and there is ao ground to hold that this provision is either ultra vires or unconstitutional. Sub section (8) of Section 49 reads as under !"it shall be obligatory on the outgoing committee of society to hold elections of the incoming committee prior to the expiration of the term specified in sub-section (7-A) or extended term under sub-section (7-A A ). If the committee fails to conduct elections and has not handed over the charge on expiration of the term specified in sub-section (7-A) or extended term under subsection (7-AA), all the members of the committeee shall be deemed to have vacated their seats and the Registrar shall assume charge till the next elections are held and the new committee takes over charge. "sub-section (8) of Section 49 imposes an obligation on the outgoing committee of the society to hold elections for the constitution of the new committee prior to expiration of the term specified in sub-section (7-A)or the extended term under sub-section (7-AA ). It then lays down that if the committee fails to conduct elections and remains in charge on the expiry of the term specified or the extended term, all the members of the committee shall be deemed to have vacated their seats and the Registrar shall assume charge till the next elections are held and the new committee takes over charge. It then lays down that if the committee fails to conduct elections and remains in charge on the expiry of the term specified or the extended term, all the members of the committee shall be deemed to have vacated their seats and the Registrar shall assume charge till the next elections are held and the new committee takes over charge. After the expiry of the term specified in sub-section (7-A) or the extended term under sub-section (7-AA), the members of the committee have no right to remain in office and they continue in office until the new committee is constituted by virtue of the enabling prevision contained in Rule 43 (2) framed under the Act. This enabling provision contained in Rule 43 (2) is, however, subject to the provisions of the Act inasmuch as the rules cannot override the provisions ef the main enactmant under which they are framed. It is, therefore, clear that the enabling provision permitting the members of the committee to continue in office until constitution of the fresh committee by virtue of Rule 43 (2) is no longer available where an order is made under sub-section (8) of Section 49. Rule 43 (2) contains only an enabling provision to avoid any vacuum in the management and it does not confer any new right on the committee to continue in office after expiry of its term specified in sub-section (7-A) or the extended term under sub section (7-AA ). This being so, there is no question of infringement of any right based on Rule 43 (2) to require any prior notice being given to the committee before an order is made under sub-section (8) of Section 49. The power given under sub-section (8) of section 49 to the Registrar has to be exercised admittedly after expiry of the term of the committee fixed by the statute, when members of the committee cease to have any right to remain in office and their continuance results merely on account of failure to conduct the elections and Constitute the new committee. The condition for exercise of the power contained in sub-section (8) being specified, it is difficult to appreciate the contention that the power given to the Registrar is uncontrolled or arbitrary of that it interferes with any right of the members of the committee so as to require a prior notice to them before its exercise. The condition for exercise of the power contained in sub-section (8) being specified, it is difficult to appreciate the contention that the power given to the Registrar is uncontrolled or arbitrary of that it interferes with any right of the members of the committee so as to require a prior notice to them before its exercise. The entire challenge to the validity of sub-section (8) of Section 49 is based on the erroneous assumption that the members of the existing committee have a right to continue in office till the constitution of the new committee even after the expiry of their term fixed by the statute, by virtue of Rule 43 (2)framed under the Act. As earlier pointed out, the provision made under rule 43 (2) is merely an enabling provision to avoid any vacuum in the management of the society and it does not confer "any right on the members of the committee to continue in office after expiry of their term so as to override any express provision in the Act, such as sub-section (8) of section 49. We do not find any invalidity in sub-section (8) of Section 49 of the Act and, therefore, the first contention urged in support of these petitions is rejected. Power available under Section 49 (8) being available on existence of the condition precedent mentioned therein, its exercise without existence of the condition precedent can always be challenged and there was no need to lay down a procedure for deciding whether the condition exists. ( 6 ) IN view of the stand taken by the State Government and the statement by the learned Advocate-General, which has been noted earlier, it is not necessary for us to express any concluded opinion on the construction of sub-section (8) of Section 49 of the Act. The learned advocata-General referred to Rale 23 and particularly sub-rule (3)therein of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1962, to indicate the society's obligation to enambe holding of elections for constitutions a new committee. It is sufficient to state that in none of these petitions. necessary averments have been made to indicate prima facie performance of its obligation by the concerned society to initiate the election process in accordance with the obligation placed on it inter alia by the first part of sub-section (8) of Section 49. It is sufficient to state that in none of these petitions. necessary averments have been made to indicate prima facie performance of its obligation by the concerned society to initiate the election process in accordance with the obligation placed on it inter alia by the first part of sub-section (8) of Section 49. This being so, assuming the petitioner's construction of sub-section (8) of Section 49 to be correct, that the provision is attracted only where the committee default in its obligation to conduct the elections, the non-existence of this condition precedent has not been shown by the petitioners in any of these petitions. The alternative argument urged in support of these petitions that the condition precedent for exercise of the power under sub-section (8) of Section 49 of. the Act is non-existent, does not, therefore, arise in any of these cases. Considerable argument was addressed from both sides about the true meaning of subsection (8) of Section 49, but it is not necessary to express any concluded opinion thereon for this reason and we would leave the matter open for decision in a suitable case. ( 7 ) IN view of the statement made on behalf of the State in writing and also by the learned Advocate General at the hearing before us, that steps have been commenced for holding elections to constitute the new committees, as early as practicable, and that such elections would be completed in case of all the non-credit primary societies by the end of december 1982, we are of the opinion that the relief which the petitioners could happen to get in these petitions, has been substantially conceded by the State Government, while making such a statement. There is no dispute that a minimum period of 40 days is required for holding such election land, therefore, even if these petitions were to be allowed, no further relief in this behalf could be given. That relief has now become unnecessary in view of the stand taken by the State Government before us. The only surviving matter pertains to continuance of the existing committee till fresh elections are held. That relief has now become unnecessary in view of the stand taken by the State Government before us. The only surviving matter pertains to continuance of the existing committee till fresh elections are held. We consider it unnecessary to further examine this question in view of the fact that any defect in the impugned order sub-section (8) of Section 49 of the Act, has not been shown and the period during which this interim arrangement is to exist is too short to require any interference therewith. Moreover, during this interim period, the person given charge in each such society is some official or ostensibly an independent person. We may add that similar petitions. Misc. Petition No. 1129/82, decided on 4-9-1982 (Kamlakar chaturvedi v. State of M. P.), and Misc. Petition No. 1139 of 1982, decided on 7-9-1982 (Rafique Khan v. State of M. P.), have also been dismissed by other Division Benches of this Court. ( 8 ) CONSEQUENTLY, no case is made out for granting any relief to trie petitioners in excess of that already conceded by the State Government in its statement referred to earlier. All these petitions are, therefore, dismissed. Petition dismissed. .