BALAKRISHNA, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is one of the primary members of respondent-2 society. There are nine members in the Managing Committee of the said society elected by the primary members and the members so elected during the year 1987 are mentioned in paragraph-2 of the writ petition. According to Bye-law No. 23 of the Bye-laws framed by the society, any member who abstains consecutively for three meetings of the Managing Committee without valid reasons, is deemed to have been retired as a Director of the Managing Committee. According to the petitioner, seven Directors have not attended more than three consecutive meetings of the society and, therefore, they have ceased to be the members of the society. Specifically it is stated that these members did not attend the meeting of the Managing Committee on 29-9-1987, 22-10-1987, 6-11-1987, 16-11-1987, 4-12-1987, 8-1-1988 as well as 20-2-1988. ( 2 ) IN the special general body meeting of the society that was held on 20-2- 1988, which was attended by 354 members who constituted more than 75% of the primary members of the society, a resolution was passed to ihe effect that respondent-1 be requested to take action to disqualify the said members as Directors of respondent-2 society by invoking the powers under Section 126a of the Karna- taka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter called 'the Act' ). The resolution is Annexure-G. A request was stated to have been made by the society of which the petitioner is a primary member tor the disqualification of the seven Directors who are the members of the Managing Committee of respondent-2 society. However, an endorsement was issued vide Annexure H dated 21-3-1988 by respondent-1 declining the request for disqualification of the seven Directors. In the endorsement, it was mentioned that the resolution of the general body itself was contrary to law and opposed to section 28 of the Act. The petitioner is, therefore, aggrieved by the impugned endorsement dated 21-3-1988 vide annexure-H. ( 3 ) THE point for consideration is whether respondent-1 should have passed an order to the effect that the seven directors have ceased to be the members of the Managing Committee of respondent-2 society. The petitioner is, therefore, aggrieved by the impugned endorsement dated 21-3-1988 vide annexure-H. ( 3 ) THE point for consideration is whether respondent-1 should have passed an order to the effect that the seven directors have ceased to be the members of the Managing Committee of respondent-2 society. ( 4 ) ACCORDING to Annexure-H, what emerges is, firstly, that at the special general body meeting the resolution passed for the removal of seven Directors from the Managing Committee of the society is contrary to Section 28 of the act. Secondly, that the seven Directors enjoy the majority support and, therefore, the resolution should not be carried out and the transactions of the society should go on as usual as it was prior to the holding of the special general body meeting. Thirdly, that without quorum, r,o meeting shall be held. ( 5 ) IT is relevant to refer to the provisions of Section 126a of the Act which read as follows :"126a. Removal and Disqualification of a member of a committee- (1) if any member of a committee of a cooperative society during the term of his office,- (a) becomes subject to any disqualification specified in section 29c ; or (b) has acted or has been acting fraudulently or with gross negligence or in contravention of the provisions of this Act, the rules or the bye-laws of the co-operative society or without the sanction of the committee of the co-operative society where such sanction is necessary or contrary to any resolution of the co-operative society or its committee or in any way prejudicial to the interest of the co-operative society; or (c) has acted or has been acting persistently against the directions or orders issued under the Act or the rules made thereunder; or (d) is not discharging his duties satisfactorily, the Registrar may, either on a report made to him or otherwise, by order, remove such member and in cases falling under clauses (b), (c) and (d) disqualify him from serving on the committee of the co-operative society or holding any office in any co-operative society for such period, not exceeding three years, as he may specify : provided that no such order shall be made except after giving such member an opportunity of making representation. (2) A copy of the order made under sub-section (1) shall be communicated to the member and the co-operative society concerned. (2) A copy of the order made under sub-section (1) shall be communicated to the member and the co-operative society concerned. " ( 6 ) ACCORDING to Section 126a (1) (b) of the Act, if any member of a committee of a co-operative society during the term of his office has acted or has been acting in contravention of the Act, Rules or the bye-laws of the co-operative society, the registrar may, either on a report made to him or otherwise, by order, remove such member and in cases falling under clauses (b), (c) and (d) disqualify him from serving on the committee of the cooperative society or holding any office in any co-operative society for such period, not exceeding three years, as he may specify, provided that no such order shall be made except after giving such member an opportunity of making representation. ( 7 ) THE import of this provision of law is that where a member, as in the instant case, of a committee of management of the co-operative society has contravened any of the bye-laws of the society, the Registrar is empowered either on a report received by him or even otherwise, to remove such member by an order, if the removal is under Section 126a (1) (b) of the Act, in so far as the facts and circumstances of this case are concerned. However, the law makes it clear that no such order shall be passed without giving the member likely to be affected an opportunity of making a representation. ( 8 ) ANNEXURE H is self-explanatory to the effect that respondent-1 is aware of the fact or the allegation that the seven directors have, in fact, violated bye-law no. 23 of the concerned society. It was, therefore, his duty to exercise the power invested in him under Section 126a of the Act. All that the officer had to do was to act upon the information received by him as is evident from Annexure-H itself and called upon the concerned seven directors of the society to make their representation in regard to the allegation against them and thereafter proceed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Section 126a undoubtedly vests the power of disqualifying the seven directors, if the allegation is true, from serving on the committee of the co-operative society for a period not exceeding three years. Section 126a undoubtedly vests the power of disqualifying the seven directors, if the allegation is true, from serving on the committee of the co-operative society for a period not exceeding three years. However, the impugned endorsement Annexure-H has been issued by respondent-1 probably on account of the misconception that he has no such powers. ( 9 ) IN the above circumstances having regard to the fact that the majority of the members of the Managing Committee of the society having allegedly committed violation of bye-law No. 23 of the society, it is imperative that without further loss of time steps are initiated by the authority contemplated under Section 126a of the Act to examine the allegation made and take such action in accordance with law as the circumstances warrant after affording an opportunity to the seven directors to make their representation against the allegation. It is open to the authorities under the Act to consider what action should be taken in accordance with law if the majority of the members of the Managing Committee are found to be disqualified for the future conduct of the affairs of the society. ( 10 ) I, therefore, pass the following : order annexure-H is quashed and I direct respondent-1 to notify the following members of the Managing Committee of respondent 2 society of the allegation that they have violated bye-law No. 23 of the Bye-laws of the society and invite their objections or explanation and thereafter to proceed to pass appropriate orders in the facts and circumstance; made out before him in accordance with law in regard to the question of disqualification of each of them from the membership of the Committee of Management of the society. I further direct respondent-1 that the matter shall be disposed of within a time limit of sixty days from the date of receipt of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. 1. Ashok Shankar Movarkar ; 2. Mahalingappa Neginahal ; 3. Kadappa Byrappa Jadhav ; 4. Mallappa Kallappa Shivapuri ; 5. Krishnappa Balappa Thattimani ; 6. Thippana Revappa Patrada ; and 7. Smt. Gangavva d/o Adiveppa Kivati. ( 11 ) A copy of this order shall be communicated to respondent-1 forthwith. ( 12 ) SRI B. J. Somayaji, High Court government Pleader, is directed to take notice for respondent-1 and is permitted to file his memo of appearance within two weeks from today. Thippana Revappa Patrada ; and 7. Smt. Gangavva d/o Adiveppa Kivati. ( 11 ) A copy of this order shall be communicated to respondent-1 forthwith. ( 12 ) SRI B. J. Somayaji, High Court government Pleader, is directed to take notice for respondent-1 and is permitted to file his memo of appearance within two weeks from today. Writ petition allowed. --- *** --- .