V. K. KHANNA, J. ( 1 ) PETITIONER No. 1 is a Co-operative Housing Society registered under the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and by means of the present writ petition it was challenged the action of the Assistant Housing Commissioner/assistant Registrar, U. ,p. Avas Evam Vikas Prishad, Lucknow, respondent No. 3, in superseding the committee of Management in exercise of power under Section 29 (4) of the act. It has been alleged in the writ petition that the Committee of Management of petitioner No. 1 was selected on 20th July, 1986 and in view of the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder the term of the committee of Management had not come to an end on the date of passing of the order of respondent No. 3. ( 2 ) AT the admission stage the contesting respondents have been served and the parties have exchanged counter and rejoinder affidavits. The present writ petition is thus being finally disposed of in accordance with the Rules of the Court. ( 3 ) ACCORDING to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the contesting respondents, there was no election of the Committee of Management of petitioner No. 1. It has bean alleged that only a provisional Committee of management was functioning aad there was no Annual General Meeting of petitioner No. 1 in which has required by the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder the election to elect the first Committee of Management had taken place. The respondents in the present writ "petition very specifically took up the case that it is not the elected Committee of Management which has been superseded but the provisional Committee of Management which had come in existence after the registration of the society on 25th April, 1986. ( 4 ) A bare perusal of the impugned order superseding the Committee of management dated 10th June, 1988 would show that respondent No. 3 has exercised his power under Section 29 (4) (a) of the Act on the ground that no election in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder had taken place before the expiry of the period of the Committee of Management as contemplated under Section 29 (3) of the Act. ( 5 ) FILE sole question which arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether respondent No. 3 had power to supersede the Committee of management under Section 29 (4) (a) of the Act. For the purposes of adjudicating the aforesaid question it will be useful to reproduce the provisions of Sections 29 (1), (2), (3) and (4);"29. Committee of Management. (1) The management of every Co-operative society shall vest in a Committee of Management constituted jn 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. (2) The term of the elected members of the Committee of Management shall be such as may be provided in the rules or the bye-laws of the Society : provided that they shall after the expiry of their term continue as members of the Committee of Management (until fresh elections are held by the Society or other arrangements are made by the registrar under this section ). (3) It shall be duty of the Committee of Management to take step before the expiry of its terms for election of members of the committee of Management as provided in Section 32 at an annual general meeting, and the members so elected shall replace the members whose term expires under sub-section (2 ). (4) If the Society fails to elect the members of Committee ot Management betore the expiry of the term of the outgoing Committee of management, the Registrar (i) in the case of an apex or a central Society, shall appoint an administrator, and (ii) in the case of any other Society, may appoint an Administrator, for the Management of the affairs of the Society until the election of the members of the committee of Management is held, and he shall have power to make any change in such arrangement from time to time : provided that for so long as no Administrator is appointed in an apex or central Society under this sub-section, the Secretary of the Society shall be in charge only of the current duties of the committee of Management for a period not exceeding four weeks. (5 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (6 ). . . . (5 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (6 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7) -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ( 6 ) A bare perusal of Section 29 (2) would show that the terms of the elected members of the Committee of Management shall be such as may be provided in the rules or bye-laws of the Society. At this juncture it will be useful to re-produce the provisions of Rule 406 of the Rules framed under the Act which provides for the term of the provisional Committee of management :"406. The provisional Committee of Management constituted under clause (iii) of Rule 404 and the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman elected under subs-rule (iv) of that rule shall hold office till the committee of Management is duly constituted in the first annual general meeting and the Chairman and Vice-Chairman are duly elected, respectively. " ( 7 ) FROM the aforesaid Rule it is, therefore, clear that the provisional committee of Management constituted under Rule 404 (iii) will hold office till the Committeeb of Management is duly constituted in the first annual general meeting and the Chairman and Vice-Chairman are dule elected, respectively. If that be so, on the case taken by the respondents in the counter affidavit respondent No 3 could not have exercised the power under section 29 (4) (a) of the Act, as under Section 29 (2) of the Act the term of the provisional Committee of Management would be till the Committee of management is duly constituted in the first annual general meeting. On the basis of the case taken by the contesting respondents there had neither been first annual general meeting of the Society nor any election to the Committee of Management had taken place In such circumstances, the term of the provisional Committee of Management had not come to an end in view of the specific provisions of section 29 (2) of the Act. We may make it clear that we cannot record any finding on the question as to whether the case taken by the respondents is correct inasmuch as while passing the order under Section 29 (4) of the Act, no opportunity had been provided to the petitioner and the case being put forward by the petitioner had not been examined by respondent No 3 before exercising its power. On the basis of the facts pleaded before us by respondents, the only power available to the respondents in such a situation was under Section 33 of the Act and not under Section 29 (4) of the Act if at all. ( 8 ) FOR the reasons stated above, in our opinion, the impugned order superseding the Committee of Management of petitioner No. 1 is liable to be quashed. ( 9 ) IN view of the discussion made above, the present writ petition is allowed and the orders dated 11th October, 1988, and 12th August, 1988, contained in Annexures 3 and 2 to the writ petition and counter-affidavit respectively are quashed. However, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case the parties shall bear their own costs. ( 10 ) LET a certified copy of this order be given to the learned Counsel for the parties within a week on payment of usual charges. Petition allowed. .