Judgment :- 1. The petitioner, who claims to be the elected President of the Karuvatta North Service Co-operative Society, hereinafter called 'the Society', has approached this Court with a prayer to quash Ext. P5, an order dated 9-7-1981, passed by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General) 1st respondent herein, and Ext. P6 notice dated 16-7-1981, issued by the Secretary of the Society, 3rd respondent herein, for holding another meeting to elect the President of the Society in pursuance of Ext. P5. 2. The first respondent is Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General), 2nd respondent is joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies and respondents Nos. 4 and 5 are Members of the Board of Directors of the Society nominated by the 2nd respondent and respondents 6 and 7 are Members elected to the Board of the Society at the election held on 21-6-1981. 3. At the election held on 21-6-1981, 9 members including the petitioner and respondents 6 and 7 were elected to the Board of the Society. Respondents 4 and 5 were nominated by the 2nd respondent by his order dated 29-6-1981, a copy of which is Ext. P2 Thereafter, in order to elect the office bearers of the Society, the 3rd respondent issued a notice dated 6-7-1981, a copy of which is Ext. P1, for holding a meeting of the members elected to the Director Board on 9-7-1981 at 11.15 a. m. at Indira Bhavan, Kallimel under the Presidentship of Shri P. Bhaskara Kurup. Second item in the agenda for the said meeting was election of the President of the Board and his taking charge. A meeting of the Members of the Board in pursuance of Ext. P1 notice took place in the Society Building, Indira Bhavan, at 11.15a.m. on 9-7-1981. At the meeting respondents 4, 5, 6 and 7 without participating in the election of the President staged a walk-out and they subsequently filed a petition, a true copy of which is Ext. P4 before the 1st respondent-Assistant Registrar, who on receipt of the same, on the same day, issued Ext. P5 order to the 3rd respondent directing him to convene another meeting of the Board of Directors. In pursuance of this order, Ext. P6 notice was issued by the 3rd respondent to hold a meeting on 21-7-1981 at 11 a.m. at the office of the Society. 4. Strongly assailing Ext. P5 order and Ext. P5 order to the 3rd respondent directing him to convene another meeting of the Board of Directors. In pursuance of this order, Ext. P6 notice was issued by the 3rd respondent to hold a meeting on 21-7-1981 at 11 a.m. at the office of the Society. 4. Strongly assailing Ext. P5 order and Ext. P6 Shri Mohammed Nazir, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, contended that Ext. P5 order is one passed without jurisdiction and therefore Ext. P6 also has no validity in law, that the 1st respondent has no jurisdiction to set aside an election of office bearers already held or interfere with that election by ordering to convene another meeting for the said purpose and that the remedy to the aggrieved party, if any, was to seek appropriate relief under S.69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, for short 'the Act', by referring or bringing the dispute before the Registrar. 5. All the respondents have been duly served in 1981 itself and none of the respondents has filed any counter denying the various allegations and averments made in the petition or challenging the correctness of the statement made and contentions raised in the petition. At the time when this O. P. came up for hearing, respondents were not represented by any counsel also. 6. Ext. P3 is the minutes of the meeting of the first meeting of the Board of Directors held on 9-7-1981 in pursuance of Ext. P1 notice. All the 9 elected members and the 2 nominated members, viz, respondents 4 and 5, were present. At this meeting, as stated earlier, for some reason or other, respondents 4 to 7 staged a walk-out without participating in the election. The remaining Members of the Board continued the meeting in accordance with the rules and the agenda for the meeting, and the petitioner was elected as the President of the Society, as is clear from Ext. P3. The averments made by the petitioner in this behalf are supported by the copy of the minutes of that meeting. Ext P3. The objection taken by respondents 4 to 7 to the above said meeting are stated in Ext. P4, the objection filed by them. P3. The averments made by the petitioner in this behalf are supported by the copy of the minutes of that meeting. Ext P3. The objection taken by respondents 4 to 7 to the above said meeting are stated in Ext. P4, the objection filed by them. Whatever might be the reasons, if they were really aggrieved by holding of the meeting and the election of the President at that meeting, the remedy lay in initiating appropriate proceedings to set aside the election under S.69 of the Act. No election petition or any proceedings under S.69 has been initiated by respondents 4 to 7 in this respect. The action of the first respondent issuing Ext. P5 order directing the respondent No. 3 to hold another meeting to elect a President amounts to interference with the election of the petitioner at the meeting duly held on 9-7-1981. The first respondent has no jurisdiction to cancel an election of an office bearer of the Society or interfere with the same in any manner as has been done in this case. This apart, no notice or any opportunity has been given to the petitioner before passing Ext. P5 order. On the facts and circumstance of this case, it is clear that Ext. P5 order is one passed without jurisdiction and Ext. P6 notice issued pursuant to the said order is invalid in law. In the result, this O. P. is allowed and Exts. P5 and P6 are hereby quashed.