A. R. TIWARI, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner was the primary member of the society (Neemuch Sahakari Vipanan Sanstha Maryadit Neemuch ). On 21 2 1989, a complaint was received against the petitioner, to the effect that the petitioner was a Patwari and had suffered dismissal from service as per order dated 3 9 1973 passed by the State Government. On issuance of show cause notice, the petitioner explained that he was not dismissed from service but was only removed without any stigma (Annexure P/4 ). A Commitee was constituted to enquire into this matter and submit its report The Committee report Annexure P/6 on 15 4 1989 in. favour of the petitioner. The matter was placed before the Board of Directors. The respondent No. 1, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, passed order on 17 7 91 (Annexure P/18) expelling the petitioner from primary membership of the society Aggrieved by this order, the petitione? has filed this writ petition seeking quasbment of the same. Respondents 1 and 2 filed return in opposition. ( 2 ) ON request of the parties, the petition is finally heard. ( 3 ) T have beard both sides. On 6 8. 1991 this Court had directed that operation of the order Annexure P/18 shall remain stayed. ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order under Section 19-A ot the M P Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 is not permissible without giving reasonable opportunity ot hearing to the affected person. He also submitted that favourable report submitted by the Committee (Annexure P/16) was not liable to be ignored or dislodged without hearing the petitioner. Her therefore, submits that the order is improper and vitiated. ( 5 ) COUNSEL for the respondents, on the other hand, submitted that direction may be issued to respondents 1 and 2 to decide the question afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. ( 6 ) IN AIR 1988 SC 906 (Brij Nandan Kansal v. State of U. P and another) it is held as under :"the State Government could not ignore the findings of the Tribunal applying the principles of judicial review of administrative actions by a court of law. ( 6 ) IN AIR 1988 SC 906 (Brij Nandan Kansal v. State of U. P and another) it is held as under :"the State Government could not ignore the findings of the Tribunal applying the principles of judicial review of administrative actions by a court of law. The State Government could not ignore the findings of the Tribunal without giving an opportunity to the delinquent to show cause against the proposed view of the Government and passing the impugned order on the basis of the report of the Legal Remembrancer. The Tribunal's findings in the earlier report clearly indicated that there was no evidence to sustain the charges against the appellant and in that view the impugned order of dismissal could not legally be passed against the delinquent. " ( 7 ) IT is noticeable that the order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. ( 8 ) IN the result, I quash order Annexure P/18, but grant liberty to respondents 1 and 2 to decide the question of expulsion consistent with principles of natural justice in conformity with law, within a period of three months from today. ( 9 ) THE petition is, therefore, partly allowed in terms Indicated above, but without any order as to costs. Security amount, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioner after due verification. .