J. N. PATEL, J. ( 1 ) LEAVE to add the District Registrar, Coop. Societies, Nadiad as party respondent. ( 2 ) RULE. Mr. Ravindra Shah waives service of rule on behalf of respondent Nos 1 to 7 and Mr. Joshi, Ld. AGP waives service of rule on behalf of newly added respondent No. 8-District Registrar. With the consent of parties matter is taken up for final hearing today. ( 3 ) THE short facts of the case appear to be that the nomination forms of the petitioners were rejected for election of the members of the Managing Committee on the ground that the petitioners do not hold minimum ten shares of the bank. As per the petitioners that they are holding 40 shares and in any case more than ten shares. Therefore, on the same date, they had drawn the attention of the election officer. However, nothing came out and therefore the petitioners have filed lavad suit being Lavad Suit No. 1317/03 before the Registrar, Board of Nominees. In the said lavad suit the petitioners have also filed application being Application Exh. 4 for temporary injunction. The learned advocate for the petitioner at the time of hearing of application Exh. 4 also submitted application Exh. 25 requesting the learned Nominee to decide the suit itself since the matter was, as per the petitioner, regarding the interpretation of byelaws and the evidence which was produced on record. It is the case of the respondents that the Ld. nominee had heard the application Exh. 4. However, Ld. nominee passed judgment and order, dated 9. 6. 03 whereby the suit is allowed and it is declared that the nomination forms of the petitionerrs are wrongly rejected and the election is set aside and it is directed to hold the election from the stage where the election was stayed and is directed to complete the same within a period of one month. It appears that on account of rejection of nomination forms of the petitioners, the remaining six candidates who are respondent Nos 2 to 7 were declared elected as uncontested and such declaration is set aside by the learned Nominee. ( 4 ) THE respondent Nos 1 to 7 preferred Appeal being Appeal No. 810/03 before the Gujarat State Coop. Tribunal and in the said appeal, application for interim stay was also submitted. The Ld. ( 4 ) THE respondent Nos 1 to 7 preferred Appeal being Appeal No. 810/03 before the Gujarat State Coop. Tribunal and in the said appeal, application for interim stay was also submitted. The Ld. tribunal allowed the said application and stayed the operation of the order of the Ld. Nominee and the said order of the Ld. Tribunal dated 30. 8. 03 passed below the interim application is challenged in this petition by the petitioners. ( 5 ) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vyas and Mr. Shah for respondent Nos 1 to 7 it appears that there is a consensus between the parties that if the respondent Nos 2 to 7 for the present are not allowed to function as the members of the managing committee, the consequence would be that five members who are duly elected and whose term was not over will have to function as the members of the managing committee. Mr. Shah submitted that as per byelaw the remaining five members do not constitute coram and if the respondent Nos 2 to 7 are not allowed to function as the members of the managing committee of the respondent No. 1-society, the administration would be parlysed. Therefore, Mr. Shah, under the instructions of his clients, submitted that with a view to see that remaining five members can constitute a coram and one additional member or one person if nominated by the Dist. Registrar, Nadiad would be coopted by aforesaid 5 persons of the members of the managing committee and including such nominated member of the District Registrar plus these five members would be there in the managing committee and as a result thereof the managing committee can be allowed to take care of the administration of the respondent No. 1-society. There is also cnsensus between the learned counsel for both sides that they shall make a request to the learned tribunal for remanding the suit for evidence to be led and the suit to be decided thereafter on its merits. However, the learned counsel have prayed that some time bound programme may be given to the learned nominee since the matter is pertaining to the election of the cooperative society. Mr. Joshi, Ld. AGP has left the matter to the court for giving direction to the Ld. However, the learned counsel have prayed that some time bound programme may be given to the learned nominee since the matter is pertaining to the election of the cooperative society. Mr. Joshi, Ld. AGP has left the matter to the court for giving direction to the Ld. District Registrar for nomination of member who has to function as member of the Managing Committee in respondent No. 1-society. ( 6 ) CONSIDERING the aforesaid and the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the following directions would meet with the ends of justice: (I) the order of the learned tribunal 30. 8. 03 shall stand modified to the extent that the respondent Nos 2 to 7 shall not be allowed to function as the members of the managing Committee of the respondent No. 1-society with a further direction to the District Registrar, Nadiad, the respondent No. 8 herein, to nominate one person who shall be coopted or allowed to function as the member of the Managing Committee by the remaining five persons of the respondent No. 1-society and consequently aforesaid five and one nominated member by the Dist. Registrar, in all six members, shall continue to take care of the administration of the society until the suit is finally disposed of by the learned nominee. (II) the petitioner as well as respondent Nos 1 to 7 shall make appropriate prayer to the learned tribunal before whom the appeal is pending to remand the matter to the learned nominee for evidence and for its decision and it is hoped that the learned tribunal shall consider the matter accordingly and shall give some time bound programme also to the nominee in the event suit is directed to be decided after the evidence is led. ( 7 ) MR. SHAH requested that it may be clarified by this court that if the learned nominee has to decide the suit after the evidence is led, he may decide the suit independently without being in any manner influenced by the judgment and award passed earlier which the subject matter of appeal before the tribunal. In my view, since the appeal is pending before the tribunal, it will be open to Mr. Shah to make such request to the tribunal for such clarification. In my view, since the appeal is pending before the tribunal, it will be open to Mr. Shah to make such request to the tribunal for such clarification. It is needless to clarify that the suit, as and when to be decided by the learned nominee, shall be decided on the basis of material available with the learned nominee without being influenced, in any manner, by the observations made by this court in this matter. ( 8 ) RULE is made absolute in terms of aforesaid directions. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. .