ORDER Shylendra Kumar, J. Writ petition by a person who had been elected as president of the fourth respondent-Co-operative society in a special meeting of the executive committee fixed for such purpose on the expiry of the term of the previous president, but whose election has been nullified by the second respondent-assistant registrar of Co-operative societies on the premise that the meeting did not have the sufficient quorum at the time of conducting the election and that order is affirmed in appeal by the first respondent-district registrar of Co-operative societies. 2. It is aggrieved by such adverse orders, though the petitioner claims to have been declared elected by the support of all the three directors who attended the meeting held on 10-12-2006, the petitioner has approached this Court for quashing the orders declaring the election to be invalid and to prevent the conduct of fresh elections to be held on 15-7-2008. 3. I have heard Sri Chandrashekar P. Patil, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Asha M .Kurnbaragerimath, learned Government Pleader, appearing for respondents 1 to 3. 4. While Sri Patil, learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order is bad in law for the reason that no specific quorum is fixed for the meeting of the executive committee and therefore it was not open to the second respondent to have declared the election to be invalid, Ms. Asha M. Kumbaragerimath, learned government pleader, drawing attention to the provisions of Rule 14-D(3) of the Kamataka Co-operative Societies Rule,s 1960 [for short, the Rules], which was inserted by way of amendment in the year 2007, which reads as under: Rule 14-D: General Meeting: xxx (3) The quorum for the general meeting shall be the attendance of fifty per cent or one-fifth of the total number of members whichever is less. If there is no quorum at the time of transacting any business in any general meeting, such business shall not be transacted, and submits that even if the effective membership of the executive committee is taken to be seven out of the total number of nine directors, as two directors having suffered disqualification, the requisite number to constitute the quorum is four or five. In the present meeting, only three directors have attended, which is definitely without quorum. 5. In the present meeting, only three directors have attended, which is definitely without quorum. 5. This position is very obvious as it is not in dispute that including the petitioner, the total number of directors who had attended the meeting for electing the president were only three, and if so, it falls short of the quorum and orders passed by the authorities do not suffer from any infirmity and there is no need to interfere with such Orders. Writ petition is dismissed.