CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner was appointed to the post of Deputy Manager (Personnel and Administration) in the 4th respondent Society which is registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by an order dated 25. 11. 1987. Thereafter, the 4th respondent by an order dated 3. 3. 1992 offered the post of Manager (Personnel and Administration) at the Regional oil Seeds Growers' Co-operative Societies Union Ltd. , Raichur with effect form 1. 3. 1992, stating that in the event the petitioner fails to accept the above offer his services shall be dispensed with. Since the petitioner did not accept the said offer again the 4th respondent issued another notice stating that the petitioner Is given three months' notice and on the expiry of the above three months his services shall stand dispensed with without any further notice. Thereafter, an order was passed stating that the services of the petitioner would be dispensed w. e. f. 30. 9. 1992. ( 2 ) SINCE the services of the petitioner were dispensed with, he has raised a dispute before the Additional Registrar of Co-operative societies under Section 70 of the Act. in the said dispute the petitioner also made an application for grant of an interim order of stay. The Additional Registrar after hearing the parties granted an interim order of stay staying the order dispensing the services of the petitioner with a further direction to continue the services by an order dated 19. 11. 1992. This order was challenged by the 4th respondent in Revision Petition before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, bangalore. The Tribunal on hearing both the parties by order dated 11. 1. 1993 admitted the Revision Petition and granted an order of stay staying the interim order of stay granted by the Additional registrar-2nd respondent. Before passing of the order by the tribunal, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies by an order dated ( 3 ) 12. 1992 abolished the post of Deputy Manager held by the petitioner. This order is called in question by the petitioner in this petition. 3. Before passing of the order by the tribunal, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies by an order dated ( 3 ) 12. 1992 abolished the post of Deputy Manager held by the petitioner. This order is called in question by the petitioner in this petition. 3. Sri Narasimhan, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 1st respondent Registrar has no jurisdiction or authority to abolish the cadre post on the request made by the Co-operative society, in reply to this, the learned Counsel for the 4th respondent submitted that under Rule 17 of the Rules, the Registrar has all the powers to abolish the post existing in the society. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, it is useful to refer to Rule 17 of the karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 (for short 'the Rules') which reads thus:-"17. Officers and employees of Co-operative Societies, qualification etc. 1) Subject to the budget allotment sanctioned by the general Body, the managing committee shall prescribe from time to time the strength of the establishment of the Society and the scale of pay and other allowances admissible to each member thereof with the prior approval of the Registrar. " ( 4 ) FROM a reading of the above Rule, it is clear that the strength of the establishment of the society is subject to the budget allotment sanctioned by the General Body. From the above Rule, it is clear, the Registrar is conferred with the power only to accord prior approval and he has no power to abolish the existing post in the Society. The Registrar in the instant case, by order dated 30. 12. 1992 instead of according approval has abolished the very post existing in the society. This in my opinion is without authority of law. When law provides a thing to be done in a particular manner, it shall be done only in that manner. In the instant case as stated above, the Registrar is conferred with the power to accord prior approval before taking any steps to prescribe the strength of the establishment of the society. But the Registrar has abolished the very post without authority of law. ( 5 ) THE Revision Petition filed before the Tribunal was dismissed for non prosecution. In the instant case as stated above, the Registrar is conferred with the power to accord prior approval before taking any steps to prescribe the strength of the establishment of the society. But the Registrar has abolished the very post without authority of law. ( 5 ) THE Revision Petition filed before the Tribunal was dismissed for non prosecution. The consequences of the dismissal of the revision Petition filed by the 4th respondent is revival of the interim order passed in the dispute filed under Section 70 of the Act, directing the 4th respondent to continue the services of the petitioner. Since i have already held that the order of the Registrar impugned in this petition is without authority of law, the petitioner is entitled to continue in service in view of the interim order passed by the Additional registrar in a dispute filed under Section 70 of the Act. Further, the petitioner is also entitled for all back wages since he was prevented from continuing in service by virtue of the illegal order passed by the Registrar which is impugned in this petition. ( 6 ) ACCORDINGLY, Writ Petition is allowed. The order of the Registrar dated 30. 12. 1992 passed by the 1st respondent (Annexure-L) is quashed; ( 7 ) THE 4th respondent is directed to continue the services of the petitioner and pay all back wages from the date of dispensation till the date of reinstatement. --- *** --- .