S. B. SINHA, J. ( 1 ) -THIS appeal is directed against an order dated 9. 11. 98 passed by a learned single Judge of this court. The appellants herein filed the said writ application praying, inter alia, the following reliefs :"a)a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents, their men and agents and/or servants to rescind and/or to withdraw and/or to cancel the said judgment and award passed on September 22, 1998 in connection with Dispute Case No. 3 of 1998 passed by the learned Arbitrator forthwith; b)a writ of and/or in the nature of Certiorari directing the respondents, their men and agents to transmit all the records relating to this case before this Hon'ble court so that conscionable justice may be administered by quashing the said Judgment and award dated September 22, 1998. " ( 2 ) THE fact of the matter is not in dispute. The election of the delegates of the Sanhaldih Project Employees Co-operative Stores Limited was held on 28. 12. 97. A dispute case as regard the validity of the said election was filed in terms of the provisions of the West Bengal Co-operative Society Act on 28. 1. 98. However, this Annual General Meeting was held on 15. 3. 98 wherein the Direct Ors were elected. The Arbitrator before whom the dispute has been referred, not only held that the election of the delecate was void but also held that the election of the Directors in the Annual General Meeting held on 15. 3. 98 was also void. ( 3 ) THE learned trial Judce by reason of the impugned order held :"the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition is the award dated 22. 9. 98 passed by the Arbitrator in dispute case arising out of section 95 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 setting aside the election of the delegates of Santhaldih Project Employees Co-operative Stores Ltd. has Challenged. The petitioners contend that though in the dispute case the Annual General Meeting of the said society which was held on 15. 3. 98 was not challenged but by the aforesaid impugned award the said Annual General Meeting was also declared void which according to the writ petitioners was beyond the scope of the dispute. The petitioners contend that though in the dispute case the Annual General Meeting of the said society which was held on 15. 3. 98 was not challenged but by the aforesaid impugned award the said Annual General Meeting was also declared void which according to the writ petitioners was beyond the scope of the dispute. The Annual General Meeting, no doubt was held with the delicate whose elections were disputed in the aforesaid dispute case and as such an award setting aside the delegate election having not been disputed on any ground of illegality and/or infirmity, the annual general meeting of the co-operative society cannot be sustained in law simply on the reason that the same was held with the delegates whose elections were not valid as per the said award and therefore, this writ petition does not merit any consideration and hence the same is dismissed". ( 4 ) MR. Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has raised a short question in support of this appeal. The learned counsel submits that keeping in view the fact that the dispute which had been referred to the learned Arbitrator was only in relation to the validity or otherwise of the election of the delegates held on 28. 12. 97 and such dispute having been referred to the Registrar on 28. 1. 98, the Arbitrator has no jurisdiction to consider the validity or otherwise of the election of the Direction held in the Annual General Meeting on 15. 3. 98. According to the learned counsel, such dispute should have also been brought within the purview of the reference by making an amendment or by raising another dispute. Although the learned counsel is technically correct, we are of the view that as the election of the Director was to be made from amongst the delegates, the Director could not have been elected, if the election of the delegate itself is void, as the consequence of the invalidity of the election of the delegates vis-a-vis the election of the director held in the Annual General Meeting is automatic. ( 5 ) IN this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case in which this court should exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. ( 6 ) MR. ( 5 ) IN this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case in which this court should exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. ( 6 ) MR. Chatterjee, learned counsel for the appellants in this situation has attracted the finding of the learned Arbitrator but we are informed at the Bar that an appeal is pending before the Tribunal at the instance of the respondent. If that be so, there cannot be any doubt that the appellants herein can raise all contentions in the pending appeal irrespective of the judgment passed by this court. If the appeal is allowed by the Tribunal, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever, that this entire award passed by the aribtrator has to be set aside, as a result whereof the election of the Directors shall also stand validated. With aforementioned observations, this appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.