Judgment N. Roy, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State and in the facts and circumstances of the case, this application is being disposed of at the admission stage itself with consent of the parties. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the Notification as contained in Memo No 4988/i4/vidhi (3)-14/93, dated 8th July, 1993, issued by respondent No.2, whereby and whereunder it has been directed that the term of the Managing Committee of the Dhanbad central Co-operative Bank, Ltd. Dhanbad, (hereinafter to be referred to as the Committee for short) is to expire on 31-3-1993 and the grace period is also to expire on 31-12-1993 and, therefore, the election for the said Bank should be held within that period. A copy of the said Notification dated 8th July, 1993, is contained in Annexure 5 to this writ petition. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from taking any step either for holding any election or for superseding the committee of the Bank. 3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to this writ petition are as follows : in order to constitute a new Managing Committee for the said Bank, of which the petitioner is a Director, the election for electing the Directors/ office bearers of the Committee was fixed to be held on 13-1-1991. Consequently thereof the election was held on 13-1-1991 and the petitioner was elected to the said Committee. Since election of 2/3rd members of the committee (except one Vice Chairman and 13 Directors) was completed, the Managing Director of the said Bank communicated the result of the election to the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies and other concerned authorities of the State Government with a view to enable the State Government to complete the constitution of the Committee by nominating the chairman and other members. The petitioner on several occasions met the Registrar and the Additional Registrar of the Cooperative Societies and the other concerned authorities of the State Government to nominate the Chairman and other members from its quota in order to complete the constitution of the said Committee. The petitioner on several occasions met the Registrar and the Additional Registrar of the Cooperative Societies and the other concerned authorities of the State Government to nominate the Chairman and other members from its quota in order to complete the constitution of the said Committee. The State Government failed to nominate the Chairman and other members from its quota and thus the members of the Committee -of the Bank remained stranded for more than 16 months and was not in a position to function in view of sub-clause (2)Rule 22 of the Bihar Cooperative Societies Rules, 1959 (hereinafter to be referred to as the said Rules ). On failure of the State Government to discharge its statutory powers for electing one Chairman and other members from its quota, the petitioner moved this Court in C W J C. No.1719 of 1992 (R) for directing the State Government to exercise its powers conferred under the first proviso to sub-section (4) of Sec.14 of the Bihar Cooperative societies Act, 1935 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act" for short) The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of on 24-7-1992 directing the respondents concerned to exercise its statutory duty as envisaged under the first proviso to sub-section (4) of Sec.14 of the Act within a period of two months from the date of communication of a copy of that order. Since the order passed by this Court was not complied with the petitioner filed a contempt petition in this Court, being M. J C. No.4 of 1993, and during the pendency of that application, the State Government exercised its statutory powers aforesaid and nominated the Chairman and three other Directors on 24-3-1993. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that since the Chairman and the three Directors of the said Bank were nominated on 24-3-1993, the constitution of the Committee was completed only on that date and thus the life of the Committee should be till 31-3-1995, when it shall complete three cooperative years and besides this, the Committee is also entitled to remain in office for a further grace period of nine months, i. e. till 31-12-1995 and in that view of the matter the Notification of the State government as contained in Annexure 5 is contrary to law and not sustainable. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a case in Board of Management, N, Cooperative Ltd. Bank V/s. Deputy registrar, AIR 1983 Ori 105 . 5. In this case, a counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, wherein it has been stated that the Notification as contained in Annexure 5 is valid and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. It has been stated in the counter affidavit that the life of the said Committee of the Bank was ending on 31-3-1993 and taking into consideration the grace period of nine months, the election was to be held by 31-12-1993 as the term of the members and office bearers of the Committee cf the said Bank is for three cooperative years, as envisaged under sub-section (9) of Section 14 of the Act. 6. The question to be determined in this case is as to whether the three cooperative years shall be counted from the date of election or from the date of constitution of the Committee is completed. 7. Sub-section (9) of Sec.14 of the Act envisages that the term of the members and office bearers of the Committee of the registered society shall be three cooperative years and they shall continue to hold office after expiry of the term till the elections are held or for nine months from the close of the cooperative year, whichever is earlier. 8. Sub-sections (9) and (10) of Sec.14 of the Act and the provisos thereto run as follows :- " (9) Notwithstanding anything contained in the rules or bye-laws of a registered society, the term of the members and the officebearers of the managing committee of the registered society shall be three cooperative years, and they shall continue to hold office after expiry of their term till the elections are held or for nine months from the close of the cooperative year, whichever is earlier. (10) If, for any reason, elections are not held within the said period after expiry of the term of the members and the office bearers of the managing committee, the committee shall be deemed to have been superseded with effect from the said date within the meaning of section 41, and thereafter the business of the society shall be carried on in the manner provided by the reaction : provided that irrespective of the date when the election is so held, the term of the members and the office-bearers of the managing committee shall be deemed to have commenced from the beginning of the cooperative year in which the elections are held: provided further that the members and the office bearers who have held their respective offices beyond the period specified under sub-section (3) before coming into force of the Bihar Cooperative Societies (Sixth Amendment) Ordinance, 1974, shall be deemed to have validly held their respective offices : provided also that the members and the office-bearers of the managing committee of the registered society, who have completed their terms of office before promulgation of the Bihar cooperative Societies (Sixth Amendment) Ordinance, 1974, other than those office bearers who have ceased to hold office under sub-section (7), shall continue to hold their respective offices, till the expiration of 180 days from the date of promulgation of the said Act or till the election of the new office bearers, whichever is earlier. " 9. From a perusal of the first proviso to sub-section (10) of Sec.14 of the Act, it appears that the term of the members and the office bearers of the Committee shall bs deemed to have commenced from the beginning of the cooperative years in which the elections are held. In this case, I find that the election of the Committee was held on 13-1-1991 and three cooperative years thus was expiring on 31-3-1993 and the grace period as provided in sub-section (9) of Sec.14 of the Act is to expire on 31-12-1993 and in that view of the matter, I find that the Notification as contained in Annexure 5 is in accordance with law and there is no infirmity in it. Thus I am of the opinion that the term of the Committee has already expired on 31-3-1993 and the Committee is running under grace period upto 31-12-1993. Thus I am of the opinion that the term of the Committee has already expired on 31-3-1993 and the Committee is running under grace period upto 31-12-1993. Accordingly, I find no force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the constitution of the Committee was complete only on 24-3-1993 and thus its life will be upto 31-3-1995. 10. In Board of Management (supra), relied upon on behalf of the petitioner, the fact was that though the election was held on 31-8-1976, it was stayed by the Court and the order of stay was vacated only on 21-9-1979 and accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of that case, it was held that the term of the office shall be counted from 27-9-1979 on which date the order of stay was vacated In the case at hand, the said situation is not there and I find that the said Committee was not kept out of office under courts order and in that view of the matter, the decision in the board of Management (supra) has no application to the present case. 11. I have noticed above that as per sub-section (9) of Sec.14 of the Act, the term of the members and office bearers of the said Committee of the registered society is only for three cooperative years and as per the first proviso to sub-section (10) of Sec.14 of the Act the term of the members and office bearers of the said Committee shall be deemed to have commenced from beginning of the cooperative years ,in which the elections are held Admittedly, in this case the election was held on I3-I-1991 and thus, the three cooperative yearss shall be deemed to have completed by 31-3-1993 and the same shall be extended including the grace period upto 31-12-1993 and by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that since the constitution of the Committee was completed on 24-3-1993. the cooperative year shall come to an end by 31-3-1995. I accordingly hold that for counting three cooperative years, the relevant date shall be the date of election and not the date when the constitution of the said Committee was completed. 12. In the result. I tind no merit in this application and the same is dismissed, but without costs. Application dismissed.