Judgment Ravi S.Dhavan, J. 1. There is insufficiency in the pleadings before the High Court to certify that the action to convert Ali Nagar Prakhand Matsyajivi Swablambi Sahkari Samiti Ltd. into Self Supporting Co-operative Society may be incorrect. The conversion was permitted under the Bihar Self Supporting Cooperative. Societies Act, 1996. 2. Conspicuous by its absence are facts that the society in fact had at its meeting of the managing committee decided to seek consent of the members of the society for converting it into a self supporting society under the 1996 Act. Two pleadings which are mentioned in the application before the Court of Registrar, Cooperative societies, Bihar in revision Case No. 78 of 2001 are relevant. These are reproduced: "That after the enactment of the Bihar Self Supporting Co- operative Societies Act, 1996 majority of the members of the Alinagar Prakhand Matsyajivi Sahyog Samiti Limited wanted that the Society be converted into self supporting society and registered as a Swablambi Society-under 1996 Act. Therefore, on 25-1-98 the meeting of the Managing Committee-took place and it was decided to seek consent of the members of the society for converting it into Self Supporting Society under 1996 Act. The Managing Committee endorsed decision to convert the society into self supporting society, That thereafter a general body meeting of the society was called on 29-3-98 for which the information was given to the member and in the presence of 4 members of the society in the meeting of the general body of the society decided to convert the old society into a swavalambi society under the self supporting co-operative societies Act, 1996." 3. In the writ petition there is no suggestion that such a decision had not been taken. In fact, in the counter-affidavit in paragraph 4 when it has been pleaded that such a meeting took place the answer has been avoided in paragraph 7 of the rejoinder affidavit. 4. In the circumstances, this is not a case in which the High Court ought to interfere. 5. Yet for an additional reason, the fact that the Court never interfered is one aspect of the matter. Even otherwise the learned Judge has committed to error in passing the order on the writ petition. 6. Dismissed.