SHYAMSUNDAR, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner who was the secretary of kudapali village service co-operative society ltd. , hirekerur was suspended by an order dated 2-12-1988 passed by the member secretary of the common cadre authority constituted under Section 128a of the Co-Operative Societies Act. The order in question listed several misdemeanours allegedly committed by the petitioner and goes on to state that it being the intention of the authority to hold a disciplinary enquiry, pending the same the petitioner is kept under suspension from the date of that order under annexurc-b. ( 2 ) THE petitioner challenges the said order on the ground that the impugned order of suspension should have been passed by the common cadre authority and it should not have been passed by the member-secretary. To support that submission reliance is placed on the regulations framed by the registrar of societies in the year 1986. Reference in this connection is made to regulation No. 30 which says:"suspension: any secretary may be kept under suspension by the managing director of the central bank or the committee or the managing committee of the primary society. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "it is, therefore, urged the right of suspending the secretary of the society rested only with the common cadre authority which is a larger body consisting of a chairman, members etc. It is pointed out that in the instant case the suspension order is not passed by the committee but only by the member-secretary. ( 3 ) PER contra for the respondents it is pointed out that power to suspend the secretary pending holding of a disciplinary enquiry was forwarded under regulation 30 to the managing director of the central bank or the managing committee of the primary society and the said regulation empowered the managing director of the central bank to place the secretary under suspension if he was satisfied that it is necessary to do so pending enquiry by the disciplinary authority. ( 4 ) A division bench of this court in P. L. D. Bank Limited v State of Karnataka, ILR 1986 Karnataka 427 has upheld the vires of Rule 128-a of the act and also upheld the regulations framed under the agies of that provision. Herein no question touching the vires of the regulation or Section 128-a arises or is raised. Herein no question touching the vires of the regulation or Section 128-a arises or is raised. ( 5 ) THE only point of Mr. Hcbballi who appears in support of the petition is about the con-comittant power of suspending the secretary should also be exercised by the common cadre authority since that committee alone is enjoined by regulation 30. While i should readily agree with the submission as aforesaid, i should nevertheless point out that the disciplinary action in regard to a secretary placing the secretary under suspension (sic) is well within the power of the managing director of the central bank in question as enjoined by regulation 30 supra. Initiating disciplinary action is quite different from placing a person under suspension pending initiation of the disciplinary action. Regulation 30 is quite clear on the point and gives the managing director the power to make an interim order placing the erring secretary under suspension pending institution of disciplinary action by the common cadre authority. ( 6 ) THIS being the only point that arises for consideration for the reasons stated above, it fails and the writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. If any disciplinary enquiry is contemplated, i direct the persons responsible to hold the same to initiate and hold the same within six months from the date of this order. Writ petition dismissed. --- *** --- .