B. A. KHAN, J. ( 1 ) PETITIONERS seek direction to State-respondent to constitute Tribunals under the Urban Land Ceiling Act and also under the co-operative Societies Act. It is submitted in this regard that though Section 12 of the first Act and amended Section 77 of the second Act, provided for the constitution of these Tribunals, yet State-respondent had dithered from constituting these to the prejudice of the aggrieved parties. It is further contended that once creation of these Tribunals was statutorily provided. it was obligatory for the Government to constitute these for effective and meaningful implementation of the respective statutes. ( 2 ) IN its reply. State-respondent has pointed out that Urban Land tribunal stands already established. But the Tribunal under the Co-operative societies Act of 1976 could not be so set up because of a lesser number of cases coming up in appeal under the provisions of the Act. ( 3 ) THERE is no dispute that Section 77 of the Co-operative Societies Act. 1976. provides for the creation of the State Co-operative Tribunal to exercise appellate power which was otherwise vested in the State Government and by delegation in the Board of Revenue. This was done by amending Act 14 of 1976 which. however, excluded Sections 9 and 38 of the Act from coming into force and provided that these be brought into force on such date as the Government by notification may appoint. Section 38 of the amending Act was envisaged to be inserted as Section 77 onwards to substitute Chapter 10 of the principal act. In other words. the relevant provision contemplated by the amending Act was to be brought into force by a subsequent Government notification. ( 4 ) THE admitted position is that till date this provision providing for the creation of the Co-operative Societies Tribunal has not been brought into force. The explanation tendered by the Government is that it was not done because the existing arrangement under the principal Act was working out satisfactorily and accordingly no necessity was felt in the facts and circumstances to press into service the amended provision providing for creation of the Tribunal. ( 5 ) PETITIONERS' case is that State-respondent was under a statutory obligation to establish a Tribunal and to issue a notification to bring Section 38 of the amending Act 14 of 1976 into force. ( 5 ) PETITIONERS' case is that State-respondent was under a statutory obligation to establish a Tribunal and to issue a notification to bring Section 38 of the amending Act 14 of 1976 into force. It is further submitted that rationale behind establishing such Tribunal was to provide a judicial review against the orders passed by various authorities under the Co-operative-Societies act, and that non-creation of the Tribunal tent amounted to taking away the power of judicial review. ( 6 ) THOUGH it is a settled proposition that this Court cannot direct the state-respondent to legislate on a particular subject-matter or issue. But once it had chosen by legislation to provide for the Appellate Forum (Tribunal) to exercise appellate power against orders passed by different authorities under the Act, it had a corresponding obligation to activate that Tribunal by promulgating appropriate notification. If it had any second thoughts in the matter, it could as well delete the relevant provision providing for the creation of the Tribunal from the statute Board and carry on with that Forum and remedies already provided under the principal Act. But it could not surely be allowed to create an anamalous situation by keeping both old and new provisions on the statute book and defeat the new legislation which was otherwise duly and validly enacted by the Legislature. By doing so, it would render itself to the charge of defeating legislation itself and at the same time render it redundant and meaningless depriving the aggrieved parties of a duly constituted Forum. In other words, once a legislation was enacted by the legislature, it could not be left to sweet will of the executive to put it into force or otherwise. In both cases. it was required to act either way. by enforcing the legislation or by scrapping or deleting it. ( 7 ) FOR the reasons given, it becomes necessary to direct the State Government and its functionaries concerned to either bring provisions of Section 38 of the amending Act 14 of 1976 of the Co-operative Societies Act into force or take steps to do away with these to remove the anamalous position otherwise created, The exercise in both cases shall be completed and appropriate orders passed within four months from the date of receipt of this order. .