Judgment :- 1. The validity of an election held on 26-12-1983 in the Pulpally Service Co-operative Bank was decided by the Assistant Registrar on 16-8-1984. The election of the 2nd respondent therein was held as invalid. Two appeals were taken from that order to the Tribunal. One was seeking a declaration to set aside the election of the entire Board as invalid. The other was challenging the disqualification as found by the Asst. Registrar. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the finding of disqualification. It further held that the election of the entire Board was vitiated. The order of the Tribunal is in challenge in this writ petition filed by all the seven members of the Board, the first among whom is the person found to be disqualified. 2. By an interim order passed by Bhaskaran Nambiar J. on 18-12-1985, petitioners 2 to 7 whose election was not tainted, were permitted to continue as the members of the Managing Committee. The disability of the 1st petitioner was not lifted by the interim order. 3. Both the authorities have found that the 1st petitioner bad dual membership, one in the Pulpally Service Co-operative Bank and the other in the Peruvamba Service Co-operative Bank. R.27 of the Co-operative Societies Rules enjoins that such dual membership could be had only with a previous sanction in writing of the Registrar. There was no such previous sanction. According to the Tribunal, such sanction could not be even implied from the circumstances. The finding of the Tribunal is fully justified by the materials on record. An infraction of R.27 is clearly established. That being so, the individual merits and qualifications as claimed by him, cannot come to his rescue. The disqualification under the Rule renders irrelevant individual excellence as claimed by him. The reliance placed on the bye-law to wriggle out of the effect of R.27 is also of no avail. No bye-law can prevail against the statutory rule. Equally untenable is the contention that the nomination had not been objected to contemporaneously. The order of the Tribunal setting aside the election of the 1st petitioner is fully justified in the above circumstances. 4. The Tribunal has, however, proceeded to declare the election of the entire Board as invalid and void. No bye-law can prevail against the statutory rule. Equally untenable is the contention that the nomination had not been objected to contemporaneously. The order of the Tribunal setting aside the election of the 1st petitioner is fully justified in the above circumstances. 4. The Tribunal has, however, proceeded to declare the election of the entire Board as invalid and void. Reliance was placed by the Tribunal on the decisions, Thankappan v. Co-operative Tribunal, 1979 K. L. T. 528 and Nalluri Kottayya v. State of Andhra, 1956 Andhra Weekly Reports 935 in support of that conclusion. The observations in the above decisions do not support the view taken by the Tribunal. An election of a member may be set aside on diverse grounds. R.35 of the Co-operative Societies Rules deals with the procedure regarding the conduct of the election. Some steps are basic to the proper election process. Some provisions emphasise on the qualifications and disqualifications of the individual contesting the election. Whether the entire election to a Board is vitiated or not will depend upon the nature of the violations of law as ultimately established. The disqualification of an individual member would not, by itself, invalidate the entire election. There is no dispute about the sufficiency of the period of notice for the election or about observance of other mandatory procedural requirements in relation to the election process. The mere fact that the voters' list includes the name of an unqualified or disqualified person would not upset the election in its entirety. This is a general and fundamental concept in relation to elections. A different approach can virtually wreck the entire election process in any representative body, be it a co-operative Society, a local authority, a State Legislature or the Parliament itself. Haying regard to the nature and necessity of having elections, regularly, recurringly and properly, a reasonably practical method has necessarily to be evolved. If for a single aberration in any one of the steps relating to the election the entire election process would be turned upside-down, it will virtually render the election process unworkable and meaningless. That is the principle underlying the statutory provisions which preserve the result of the election, if it is not definitely affected by such irregularities. In the light of the correct principles to be applied in such situations the Tribunal erred in setting aside the election of the other members of the Board. That is the principle underlying the statutory provisions which preserve the result of the election, if it is not definitely affected by such irregularities. In the light of the correct principles to be applied in such situations the Tribunal erred in setting aside the election of the other members of the Board. The order of the Tribunal to the extent it has set aside the entire election is erroneous and is accordingly quashed. The writ petition is allowed in part and dismissed otherwise as indicated above. There will be no order as to costs. Partly Allowed.