Judgment :- K.A. Swami, CJ. In all these writ petitions, G.O.Ms.No. 160, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries (M.P.II) Department, dated 29. 1996 issued by the State Government in the purported exercise of its power under Sec. 170 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) is challenged. The said G.O. reads thus: GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU ABSTRACT Dairy Development Milk Producers Co-operative Societies - Eligibility of Member of Vote at/or stand for election - orders-issued. ANIMAL HUSBANDRY & FISHERIES (MP.II) DEPARTMENT G.O.Ms.No.160 Dated 29. 1996. Read: 1. G.O.Ms.No.226, Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Department, dated 24. 1990. 2. G.O.Ms.No.477, Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Department, dated 9. 1990. 3. G.O.Ms.No.61, Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 13. 96. ORDER In the order second read above, Government in supersession of the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.226, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, dated 24. 1990 have ordered that notwithstanding anything contained in the by-laws of the Primary Milk Producers’ Co-operative Societies, the Members who are not otherwise disqualified to vote at, or stand for, any election in accordance with the provision of the Act or the Rules thereunder and who have supplied Milk to the Society for 120 days or 300 litres during the period commencing from the date of commencement of the preceding Cooperative year and ending on that date 30 days prior to the date of election shall be eligible to vote at or stand for any election to the society. 2. In the orders third read above, Government have issued an election schedule to complete the election process to the Co-operatives since a number of representation have been received to rescind the exemption granted in the order second read above so that all the members as contemplated in Rule 51A are made eligible to vote at or stand for any election to the society. 3. Government after consideration have decided to remove the conditions imposed in the Government Order second read above. Accordingly Government direct that the orders issued in the Government Order second read above shall be cancelled with effect from the date of issue of this order. The effect of this order is that all the Members of the Primary Dairy Co-operative Societies, who satisfy the conditions of rule 51-A of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1988 shall be eligible to vote at or stand for any election to the society. The effect of this order is that all the Members of the Primary Dairy Co-operative Societies, who satisfy the conditions of rule 51-A of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1988 shall be eligible to vote at or stand for any election to the society. (BY ORDER OFTHE GOVERNOR) Sd/-M. Raman Secretary of Government." 2. The contentions advanced by Sri R.Gandhi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and also by the other learned counsel are: that the power under Sec. 170 of the Act is not available to the Government to issue such a G.O., that even if such a power is available, it has been arbitrarily exercised, that it would go against the very object for which the Milk Producers’ Co-operative Societies were established, that no member, who does not supply milk to the Milk Producers Co-operative Society of which he is a member, can be eligible to vote, that the by-law 5 (i) (a) of the by-laws which are common to all the Milk Producers’ Co-operative Societies in the State does not permit a member who has not supplied milk of certain quantity or for certain period to the cooperative society to exercise his right to vote and therefore, the State Government has acted arbitrarily in issuing the impugned Government Order. On the contrary, it is the contention of the learned Special Government Pleader for Co-operative Societies that Sec. 170 of the Act empowers the State Government to issue the impugned G.O., that as per the provisions of the Act contained in Secs.2(17), 11(3), 23(1) (h) read with 23(2) (g) and 26(1)(c) of the Act and Rules 9, 51 and 51-A of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’), there cannot be any such disqualification as contained in by-law No.5 as long as a member is eligible to be admitted as a member and to be continued as a member and does not suffer any disqualification. It is also submitted that in 15 Milk Producers’ Co-operative Societies, there were only less than ten members eligible accordingly to G.O.No.477, dated 9. 1990, even though the membership of those so- cieties was more than hundred, in some cases it was more than 400 and in one case it was more than 1000. It is also submitted that in 15 Milk Producers’ Co-operative Societies, there were only less than ten members eligible accordingly to G.O.No.477, dated 9. 1990, even though the membership of those so- cieties was more than hundred, in some cases it was more than 400 and in one case it was more than 1000. It is submitted that Kovai Town MPCS had 1044 members but there would be no eligble voters if Ihe criteria of G.O.Ms.No.477 dated 9. 1990 were to be applied. A chart is given in this regard, which will be adverted to in the course of the judgment. Therefore, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the exercise of the power by the Stale Government is bona fide in order to enable the members of the Milk Producers’ Co-operative Societies to exercise their right to vote, which they are entitled having regard to the provisions of the Act and the Rules. In the light of these contentions, the points that arise for consideration are as follows: 1. Whether G.O.Ms.No. 160, dated 27-9-1996 can be held to be ultra vires the power of the State Government? 2. Whether the By-law can be contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Rules? 3. Point No.): Sec.2 (17) of the Act defines "Milk producers society" as follows: "17 "milk producers society" means a registered society which has as its principal object the arranging for and the undertaking of purchase of milk produced by its members and storing, processing and marketing of such milk and its products and includes any registered society which has as its principal object the provision of facilities for the operation of a milk producers society." From the definition, it is clear that the principal object of a Milk Producers’ Society is to undertake purchase of milk produced by its members and store, process and market the milk and its products. Therefore, it is necessary that for a person to become a member of a Milk Producers’ Society, he must be a milk producer. 4. Sec. 11(3) of the Act deals with the amendment of the by-laws of the society. It specifically provides that the Registrar may register the amendment of the by-laws, if it is not contrary to the provisions of the Act or the Rules or to the co-operative principles or to any other law applicable to the society. 4. Sec. 11(3) of the Act deals with the amendment of the by-laws of the society. It specifically provides that the Registrar may register the amendment of the by-laws, if it is not contrary to the provisions of the Act or the Rules or to the co-operative principles or to any other law applicable to the society. Sec.23 of the Act deals with the disqualification. Sec.23(1)(h) provides that no person shall be eligible for admission as a member of a society, if he does not possess the qualification, with reference to the principal object of the society prescribed in the rules or the bylaws. As already pointed out, the principal object of a Milk Producers Society is to purchase the milk produced by its members, store, process and market the milk and its products. Therefore a member shall have to be a milk producer. Sec.23(2)(g) of the Act further provides that a member of a registered society shall cease to be a member of the Society, if he does not possess the qualification, with reference to the principal object of the society, prescribed in the rules or the by-laws. As per the by-laws and as per the definition of ‘milk producers society’, a person to be a member shall be a producer of milk. If he ceases to be a milk producer, he shall cease to be a member of the milk producers society. If any question arises as to whether a person has ceased to be a member of the milk producers’ society or has suffered any disqualification and thereby has lost the right to vote at, or stand for, any election to the society, such a question has to be decided by the Registrar as per sub-Sec.(4) of Sec.23 of the Act. 5. Sec.26 of the Act deals with the right to vote by a member. Sec.26(1)(c) of the Act specifically provides thus.- “Save as otherwise provided under this Act and the rules, no member of a registered society shall be deprived of the right to vote in the election of the members of the board of such society.” Therefore, it is clear that a member can be deprived of his right to vote, if he does not satisfy the conditions to be a member of such society, as prescribed under the Act and the rules. 6. 6. Rule 51-A of the Rules specifically provides for eligibility to vote at, or stand for, election, which provides thus: “51-A. Notwithstanding anything contained in the by-laws of a society, the members who are not otherwise disqualified to vote at, or stand for, any election in accordance with the provisions of the Act or these rules, shall be eligible to vote at, or stand for, any election to the society.” Therefore, from Rule 51-A, it is clear that whatever may be the qualifications prescribed under the bylaws of the society, the members who are not otherwise disqualified to vote at, or stand for, any election in accordance with the provisions of the Act or the rules, will be eligible to vote at, or stand for, any election to the society. 7. We may at this stage point out that Rule 9 of the Rules, which deals with the by-laws also specifically provides that every amendment of by-laws shall be made only by a resolution passed by a majority of the members present and voting at a meeting of the general body for which notice of amendment of by- laws has been given in accordance with the rule and the by-laws. The by-laws with which we are concerned are in Tamil. A true translation of the same has been furnished by Sri R.Gandhi, learned senior counsel appearing for some of the petitioners, which reads thus: “Bye-law: 5(i)(a): Any person who is residing in the area within the jurisdiction of the society, who is above 18 years of age, who is competent to enter into a contract, who is a genuine milk producer, who undertakes to sell the milk produced by him through the society, is eligible to become a member. .(b) The application for becoming a member is to be approved by the Board of Directors of the Society. (Rejection of applications should strictly be under the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act.) .(c) The person should not be a milk vendor or a vendor of milk products. .(b) The application for becoming a member is to be approved by the Board of Directors of the Society. (Rejection of applications should strictly be under the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act.) .(c) The person should not be a milk vendor or a vendor of milk products. .(ii) Any member who had supplied less than 300 litres of milk or supplied milk for less than 120 days in the preceding Co-operative year, will not be entitled to any rights, other than pecuniary rights such as bonus, dividend, etc.” By-law 5 (i) (a) specifically provides that a person to be eligible to become a member of the society must be residing within the jurisdiction of the society, must be above 18 years of age, competent to enter into contract and must be a genuine milk producer who undertakes to sell the milk produced by him through the society. By-law 5 (ii) further provides that any member who had supplied less than 300 litres of milk or supplied milk for less than 120 days in the preceding co-operative year, will not be entitled to any right other than pecuniary rights such as bonus, dividend etc., Based on this by-law 5(ii), it is contended that a member, who does not sell the milk to the co-operative society of the aforesaid quantity or for the aforesaid period, will not be entitled to exercise his right to vote. Of course, the conditions prescribed under by-law 5 (i) (a) are in conformity with the provisions of the Act and the Rules. As far as by-law 5 (ii) is concerned, it is not possible to read that by-law as being in conformity with the provisions contained in Secs.23 (1)(1)(h), 23(2)(g) and 26(1)(c) of the Act and Rule 51-A of the Rules as pointed out earlier. 8. Now, the question for consideration is as to whether under Sec. 170 of the Act, G.O.Ms. No. 160, dated 29. 1996 would have been issued. It may be pointed out here that earlier to this G.O., there were two other G.Os issued in exercise of the powers under Sec. 170 of the Act. G.O.Ms.No.226 dated 24. 1990 was issued exempting all the Milk Producers Co-operative Societies from the provisions of Rule 51-A of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1988. As a result thereof, the condition prescribed under by-law 5 (ii) was operative. On a further representation, G.O.Ms.No.226, dated 25. G.O.Ms.No.226 dated 24. 1990 was issued exempting all the Milk Producers Co-operative Societies from the provisions of Rule 51-A of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1988. As a result thereof, the condition prescribed under by-law 5 (ii) was operative. On a further representation, G.O.Ms.No.226, dated 25. 1990 was superseded in exercise of the power under Sec. 170 of the Act by issuing G.O.Ms.No.477 dated 9. 1990, which provided thus: "4. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-Sec.(b) of Sec. 170 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 (Tamil Nadu Act 30 of 1983) and in suppression of the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.226, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries dated 26th April, 1990, the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby directs that notwithstanding anything contained in the by-laws of the Primary Milk Producers’ Co-operative Society, its members . who are not otherwise disqualified to vote at, of stand for, any election in accordance with the provisions of the Act or the rules, thereunder, and who have supplied milk to the society for 120 days or 300 litres during the period commencing from the date of commencement of the preceding Co-operative year and ending on the dale 30 days prior to the date of election shall be eligible to vote at, or stand for, any election to the society." Therefore, the conditions prescribed in the by-law came to be relaxed and any member who could supply milk to the society for 120 days or 300 litres during the period commencing from the date of commencement of the preceding Co-operative year and ending on the date 30 days prior to the date of election, was made eligible to vote. This, as already pointed out, led to a very precarious and strange situation, inasmuch as in 15 co-operative societies, which consisted of hundred and more than hundred members, only less than ten members were eligible to vote. The statement filed by the learned Additional Government Pleader in this regard along with the counter statement is as follows: 9. In order to meet the situation arising out of the operation of G.O.Ms.No.477, dated 9. 1990, to enable the members of the Milk Producers Co-operative Societies to exercise their right to vote, which they are entitled to, if they satisfy the requirements of the Act and the Rules, the State Government thought it fit to issue the impugned G.O., which has already been extracted above. 1990, to enable the members of the Milk Producers Co-operative Societies to exercise their right to vote, which they are entitled to, if they satisfy the requirements of the Act and the Rules, the State Government thought it fit to issue the impugned G.O., which has already been extracted above. The effect of the im- pugned G.O. is that where a member of a Milk Producers’ Co-operative Society has supplied milk to the cooperative society or not, if he does not suffer from any disqualification as prescribed under Sec.23 of the Act and has not been removed on the basis of such disqualification by the Registrar under sub-Sec.(4) of Sec.23 of the Act will be entitled to exercise his right to vote. Right to vote is a valuable right, which a member of the Co-operative Societies enjoys and it goes along with his membership. That being so, if the State Government has exercised its power under Sec. 170 of the Act in order to ensure that a member of a Milk Producers Co-operative Society can exercise his right to vote as a member of a co-operative society if he is not otherwise disqualified and removed from membership, it cannot be said that such exercise of the power by the Government under Sec. 170 of the Act suffers from any lack of bona fides or any legal malice can be attributed to it. Sec. 170 of the Act empowers the State Government to exempt any registered society from any of the provisions other than clause (b) of sub-Sec.(1) of Sec.88 and sub-sec.(1) of Sec.89 of the Act or of the rules subject to such conditions as may be specified and it also empowered the State Government and directs that such provisions of the rules shall apply to such society with such modifications as may be specified, in the order. Therefore; a reading of Sec. 170 of the Act makes it clear that wide powers have been conferred upon the State Government. In fact, the power conferred on the State Government under Sec.170 of the Act is nothing but a legislative power. Therefore; a reading of Sec. 170 of the Act makes it clear that wide powers have been conferred upon the State Government. In fact, the power conferred on the State Government under Sec.170 of the Act is nothing but a legislative power. The Legislature in its wisdom has conferred this right on the State Government, so that in deserving cases, the State Government can exempt such society or class of societies from any of the provisions of the Act or of the rules and direct that such provisions of the rules shall apply to such society with such modifications as may be specified. Therefore, we are of the view that the power exercised by the State Government cannot be held to be wanting in bona fide, having regard to the serious consequences that had flown from G.O.Ms.No.477 dated 9. 1990. We, accordingly, hold that G.O.Ms.No. 160 dated 29. 1996 is valid and it is well within the power of the State Government. Point No. 1 is answered accordingly. 10. Point No.2: While dealing with Point No. 1, we have already referred, as to what extent the by-law No.5 (ii) goes counter to the provisions contained in Secs.23(1)(h), 23 (2)(g) and 26 (1)(c) and also 23(4) of the Act and Rule 51-A of the Rules. It cannot be disputed that the by-laws are to be in conformity with the provisions of the Act and the Rules. Any by-law which contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Rules cannot at all be registered and it cannot also be enforced. In fact, in Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. and others v. Additional Industrial Tribunal, A.I.R. 1970 S.C. 245, it has been held that by-laws of a co-operative society framed in pursuance of the provisions of the Act cannot be held to be law or to have the force of law. It has also further been held that if a statute gives power to a Government or other authority to make rules, the rules so framed have the force of Statute and are to be deemed to be incorporated as a part of the statute and that principle, however, does not apply to bye-laws of the nature that a co-operative society is empowered by the Act to make. The bye-laws that are contemplated by the Act can be merely those which govern the internal management, business or administration of a society. The bye-laws that are contemplated by the Act can be merely those which govern the internal management, business or administration of a society. They are of the nature of the Articles of Association of a Company incorporated under the Companies Act and they may be building between the persons affected by them, but they do not have the force of a statute. Hence, we are of the view that by-law No.5 (ii) in so far as it insists that any member who has supplied less than 300 litres of milk or supplied milk for less than 120 days in the preceding Co-operative year, will not be entitled to any right other than the pecuniary right such as bonus, dividend, etc., cannot be held to be in confor-mity with the provisions of the Act and the Rules as pointed out above. 11. We may now refer to the contention of the National Dairy Development Board, the 6th respondent that the State Government had entered into an agreement with the 6th respondent. The following are the terms of para 4. of the agreement, on which reliance is placed: “4. The Federation/Union(s) concerned would adopt suitable byelaws ensuring effective functioning of the democratic process and ownership and control of the structure by the milk producers within a period of one year, failing which N.D.D.B. would consider withdrawing further financial support. The State Government will take necessary action, including amendment to the State Co-operative Law and issuance of State Notifications, to facilitate formation of village level dairy cooperative societies, District Co-operative Milk Producers Union(s) and Federations of such unions in the project area on the Anand Pattern and to enable them to function in accordance with bye-laws which are satisfactory to the N.D.D.B.” We are of the view that such an agreement cannot operate against law and there cannot be estoppel against law. We have held that the power under Sec. 170 of the Act is a legislative power. Moreover, the power exercised does not go contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The by-law, as pointed out already, is also not in conformity with the provisions of the Act and Rules. Hence, we hold that the contention of the 6th respondent is of no consequence in the matter. 12. Moreover, the power exercised does not go contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The by-law, as pointed out already, is also not in conformity with the provisions of the Act and Rules. Hence, we hold that the contention of the 6th respondent is of no consequence in the matter. 12. For the reasons stated above, the writ petitions fail and they are dismissed with the following direc-tions: (a) In the light of the findings recorded on points 1 and 2, (a) G.O.Ms.No.160 dated 29. 1996 is held as valid and .(b) By-law No.5 (ii) of the Milk Producers Cooperative Societies is declared as invalid, inoperative and unenforceable. The Milk Producers Co-operative Societies are refrained from enforcing the same. .(c) We further direct that before the elections are held to the Managing Committees, all the Milk Producers’ Co-operative Societies under the fresh notification voters list shall be published in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules and the elections shall be held as per the procedure prescribed in the Act and the Rules. Time for conducting the election is granted till the end of March, 1997. 13. W.M.Ps. are also disposed of accordingly. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.