Judgment :- K. Raviraja Pandian, J. The writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge passed in W.P.No.9445 of 1999 dated 6. 1999. 2. The first respondent herein filed writ petition challenging the order passed by the third respondent herein dated 12. 1999 wherein the first respondent was disqualified to be a director of the appellant Society under Section 34(2)(a)(i) and 34(6) on the premise that the first respondent had not repaid the jewel loan obtained by him on 24. 1997 for a sum of Rs.23,500/-. The learned single Judge by order dated 6. 1999 allowed the writ petition, by setting aside the order of the third respondent. The correctness of the said order is now put in issue in this writ appeal by the Society. 3. We heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials on record. 4. It is contended by the first respondent that the order dated 12. 1999 has been passed without any cause of action in the sense that though the first respondent has obtained loan on 24. 1997 the loan amount was cleared by the first respondent on 8. 1998 thereby there was no creditor and debtor relationship between the first respondent and the Society. In those circumstances of the case, a show cause notice came to be issued on 110. 1998. At the time of issuance of show cause notice there was no subsisting loan transaction between the first respondent and the Society. That was the reason stated by this Court, while allowing the writ petition, by stating that the provisions of Section 34(1) and 34(6) of the Tamilnadu Co-operative Societies Act were not attracted at the time of issuance of show cause notice. We do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order of the learned single Judge so as to interfere with the same as the facts are very clear that at the time of issuance of show cause notice on 110. 1998, the first respondent has cleared the loan on 8. 1998 which he obtained on 24. 1997. 5. For the fore-going reasons , the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.