JUDGMENT Mehtab S. Gill, J. - The petitioner has prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of orders dated 3.10.2000 (Annexure P1), 11.9.2000 (Annexure P-2) and 29.9.2000 (Annexure P4). 2. The petitioner has averred that the election of the Managing Committee of Naseerewal Co-operative Transport Societies Limited, Naseerewal (hereinafter referred to as the Society) was held and the petitioner was elected as the President. The Society is a primary member of Kapurthala Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Kapurthala (hereinafter referred to as the Bank). In the election of Board of Directors (hereinafter referred to as B.O.D.) of the Bank held in September, 1998, the petitioner was elected as a Director of the Bank. It has been further averred that respondent No. 2 Shri Rashbeg Singh Dhillon, brother-in-law of the Co-operation Minister, Punjab was also elected as a Director of the Bank. 3. In the election to the office-bearers of the Bank, respondent No. 2 was elected as the Managing Director. 4. In April, 1999, respondent No. 2 came in minority and a meeting of the B.O.D., was summoned for 10.4.1999. One of the items of agenda was election of representative to represent the Bank in Punjab State Co-operative Bank situated at Chandigarh. Respondent No. 2 was a candidate. To come into majority in the B.O.D. he got two Directors i.e. Sarvshri Devinder Singh and Tarlochan Singh restrained from participating in the affairs of the Bank. This order was procured from the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jalandhar Division. No notice of hearing was given to these two Directors. These two Directors challenged the order of the Joint Registrar before the Registrar who first stayed the operation of the order of the joint Registrar and resolution passed in the meeting held on 10.4.1999 and thereafter after hearing arguments at length set aside the order as also the resolution. Separate revision petition were filed against the order of the Registrar before the Financial Commissioner, Co-operation who set aside the order of Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jalandhar Division. Civil Writ Petition No. 4549 of 2000 was filed by these two Directors in which the operation of the order of Financial Commissioner was stayed. 5. Notice of motion was issued. 6. The respondents filed Written Statements. 7. I have heard arguments on behalf of the petitioner and the respondents. 8. Civil Writ Petition No. 4549 of 2000 was filed by these two Directors in which the operation of the order of Financial Commissioner was stayed. 5. Notice of motion was issued. 6. The respondents filed Written Statements. 7. I have heard arguments on behalf of the petitioner and the respondents. 8. At the time of issuing notice of motion on 6.11.2000 the counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw challenge to order dated 11.9.2000 (Annexure P2) with liberty to field an appeal against that order. He further requested that his writ petition be kept pending qua Annexures P/1 and P/4. Permission as prayed for was granted and the petitioners request for withdrawing challenge to Annexure P/2 in this writ petition with permission to file an appeal before the competent authority was granted. During the course of arguments, the counsel for the petitioner has stated that he has filed statutory appeal under Section 68 of the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 before the Deputy Registrar, Jalandhar some time in November, 2000. The petitioner cannot be allowed to seek two remedies at the same time. Even going through Annexures P1, it comes out that challenge in the same is to the cancellation of membership of the petitioner being a Director of the Society. Going through Annexure P4, it comes out that it relates to cancellation of registration of the Society. Unless and until the Deputy Registrar before whom the appeal under Section 68 of the Act is pending finally decides the same, challenge to Annexure P1 and P4 does not have any meaning. In consequence, Annexure P1 is quashed. Further, the Deputy Registrar, Jalandhar is directed to decide the appeal of the petitioner within 45 days of the receipt of a copy of this order. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Petition disposed of.