ORAL JUDGMENT :- Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 23-1-2008 passed by the respondent No.3 Minister for Co-operation in revision directing the respondent Nos. I and 2 i.e. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies and The Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies to call an Annual General Meeting of the petitioner No. I Society i.e. Usgaon Vividh Karyakari Sahakari (Vikas) Seva Society for the year 2005-2006 within a period of 30 days from the date of the issuance of the order. The original order was issued by the Assistant Registrar on 2-1-2007 directing the petitioners to convene an Annual General Body Meeting of the petitioner Society within 8 days. This order was purportedly made under section 75(1) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act on the ground that the petitioners society had failed to inform the Registrar whether the Annual General Body Meeting of the Society for the year 2005-2006 was convened or not. Merely because there was no reply the Registrar held that the Society had failed to convene the Annual General Meeting for the year 2005-2006 within stipulated period and, therefore, passed the order. Section 75(1) reads thus: "Section 75. Annual General Meeting. - (I) Every society shall, within a period of three months next after the date fixed for making-up its accounts for the year under the rules for the time being in force, call a general meeting of its members. Provided that, the Registrar may, by general or special order, extend the period for holding such meeting for a further period not exceeding three months: Provided further that, if in the opinion of the Registrar, no such extension is necessary, or such meeting is not called by the society within the extended period (if any) granted by him, the Registrar or any person authorised by him may call such meeting in the manner prescribed, and that meeting shall be deemed to be a general meeting duly called by society." There is clearly no power to the Registrar to direct any authority to convene an Annual General Body Meeting of the Society under section 75(1) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The power is conferred on the Registrar to extend the period for holding such meeting for further period not exceeding 3 months. The power is conferred on the Registrar to extend the period for holding such meeting for further period not exceeding 3 months. Sub-section (5) of section 75 of the Act reads thus: "Sub-section (5) of section 75 - If default is made, in calling a general meeting within the period or, as the case may be, the extended period, prescribed under sub-section (I), or in complying with sub-section (2), (3) or (4) the Registrar may by order declare any officer or member of the committee whose duty it was to call such meeting or comply with sub-section (2), (3) or (4), and who without reasonable excuse failed to comply with any of the aforesaid sub-sections disqualified for being elected and for being an officer or member of the committee for such period not exceeding three years, as he may specify in such an order and, if the officer is a servant of the society, impose a penalty on him to an amount not exceeding one hundred rupees. Before making an order under this sub-section, the Registrar shall give, or cause to be given, reasonable opportunity to the person concerned of showing cause against the action proposed to be taken in regard to him." This sub-section confers a power on the Registrar to declare the person, who failed to call meeting as disqualified being elected or being officer or member of a committee for the period of 3 years after sufficient notice of show cause has been given. The condition precedent for the exercise of this power under this section is that the officer of the society should have failed to call the meeting within the time prescribed or the extended time. This sub-section does not confer any power on the Registrar to annul the meeting which is already taken place and thereupon to order a fresh meeting to be held. That power can be exercised in a dispute under the Act. Here in the present case, the Assistant Registrar committed a gross error firstly in assuming that no meeting was held only because the Society did not apparently respond to a letter from him. The direction of the Assistant Registrar to hold the meeting is wholly arbitrary and liable to be set aside. Apparently the petitioners carried the matter in revision before the Minister for co-operation. The Minister has upheld the order of the Assistant Registrar on different grounds. The direction of the Assistant Registrar to hold the meeting is wholly arbitrary and liable to be set aside. Apparently the petitioners carried the matter in revision before the Minister for co-operation. The Minister has upheld the order of the Assistant Registrar on different grounds. The Minister has held that the Annual General Meeting was not convened by the Board of Directors as is required under Bye-law No. 8.8 of the Society. Bye-law No. 8.8 provides for one of the functions of Annual General Body Meeting. It reads thus :~ "8.0 - . 8.8 - In case of Annual General Body Meeting a clear notice of 14 days and in case Special General Meeting a clear notice of 7 days shall be given by publishing a copy of it on notice board of the Society and/or by publishing copy of the same in at least one daily news paper published in Goa, or any other means as considered proper by the Board. The Notice shall specify the date, place and time of the meeting and business to be transacted therein. Non-receipt of any such notice by any member shall not invalidate the proceeding of the General Body Meeting." Further the Minister seems to have set aside the meeting held by the petitioner Society on 7-7-2006 as being void. It is observed in the order as follows: "and therefore actually the Managing Committee Meeting has not taken place at all, and therefore the proceedings of meeting held on 16-6-2006 are considered as fictitious," It is clear that section 75(1) of the Act does not empower any authority to annul a meeting and direct a fresh meeting. It follows that the Minister cannot do so in a revision arising from such an order. 3. In the circumstances, the impugned order is hereby set aside. Rule is made absolute. There shall be no order as to costs.