( 1 ) PETITIONER is challenging the order of the District Registrar dated 29-6-2000. Petitioner is a society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act. It has number of educational institutions in Bellary. It has its own bye-laws and it is amended from time to time. A Special General Body Meeting was constituted on 12-3-2000 for considering the amendments. The amendments were approved by the society. Since then the society is functioning in accordance with the amended bye-laws. Respondent No. 4 approached the revenue minister by way of representations Annexure C and D, seeking cancellation of the amended bye-laws. Respondent No. 3 Revenue Minister has made a note on Annexure D stating that the amended bye laws may be cancelled by the registrar. Annexure-E has been issued by the second respondent with certain conditions. Annexure-F is an endorsement issued by the Registrar. Petitioner is therefore before me. ( 2 ) AN impleading application is filed by a member of the society in this Court. The State Government has filed a short affidavit. They justify their action. ( 3 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties. ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner says that the entire action is taken at the instance of the fourth and the fifth respondent. He wants the impugned order to be set aside. Learned Government Pleader supports the order. ( 5 ) AFTER hearing the learned counsel, I have carefully perused the material on record. ( 6 ) ANNEXURE-B is the amended by laws. The third respondent, filed representations before the Revenue Minister seeking cancellation of the amended bye-laws. It is seen at Annexure-D that the third respondent revenue minister has virtually passed an order ordering cancellation of the amended bye-laws. He states as under: amended bye-laws may be cancelled by the District Registrar, Bellary. It was thereafter Annexure-E has been issued by the Secretary, Revenue Department to the Deputy Registrar. Thereafter, the Deputy Registrar has issued Annexure-F. A joint reading of Annexures-C to F would show that the entire amendment has been cancelled at the instance of the fourth respondent. Respondent No. 4 being a representative of people has every right to render service to his electorate. But the same has to be done in a manner known to law. He has sent two representations to the Revenue Minister. Respondent No. 4 being a representative of people has every right to render service to his electorate. But the same has to be done in a manner known to law. He has sent two representations to the Revenue Minister. The Revenue Minister instead of sending the same to the Deputy Registrar for proper action has virtually chosen to issue a direction to the Deputy Registrar to cancel the bye-laws itself. This in my view is unsustainable in law. The Deputy Registrar is a statutory authority and he has to act in accordance with the scheme of the Act. The Revenue Minister cannot be permitted to issue a direction on the basis of a representation in the matter of resolution and it is also not open to the Registrar to proceed further without even hearing the petitioner at the instance of an order by the Revenue Minister. The entire action in my view is rather unfortunate and the same requires interference by this Court. Statutory provisions are to be respected and are to be followed by all concerned. In the case on hand, the Deputy Registrar has unfortunately chosen to issue Annexure-F in the light of Annexure-E and Annexure-E is passed in terms of annexure-D. Therefore a case is made out by the petitioner warranting interference by this Court. ( 7 ) IN these circumstances, this petition is allowed. Annexure-F is set aside. Liberty is reserved to the parties including the fourth respondent to avail the remedy after following the procedure in terms of the Act in the matter of his grievance if any before the appropriate authorities. Impleading applicant is at liberty to avail/participate in subsequent proceedings in the event of any further action by the parties concerned in accordance with law and no order is necessary on IA in this case. Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. --- *** --- .