JUDGMENT : B.P. Das, J. - By this Writ Petition the Petitioner challenges the Judgment dated 2.8.2008 passed by the Member, Cooperative Tribunal, Orissa, vide Annexure-5 allowing the appeal being T.A. No. 46/2008 filed by O.Ps.2 to 13 & setting aside the Order Dated 26.4.2008 passed by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Orissa, in Dispute Case No. 397/2007, vide Annexure-4, debarring O.Ps.3, 4 & 5 from acting as Secretary, Treasurer & Accountant respectively of Barsuan Iron Mines Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., Sundargarh. The Petitioner has also challenged the Order Dated 23.10.2008 passed by the Tribunal in Annexure-9 rejecting the application to review the Judgment dated 2.8.2008 in Annexure-5. 2. The case of the Petitioner is that the Barsuan Iron Mines Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. at Tensa in Sundargarh District (herein . after referred to as the "Society") was registered as a Society in the year 1976 under the Orissa Cooperative Societies Act, 1962 ("the Act"). The Petitioner being the general member & shareholder of the said Society filed Dispute Case No. 397/2007 before the Registrar of Cooperative Societies u/s 68 of the Act challenging the resolution of the Committee of Management of the Society dated 6.11.2007 to the effect that O.Ps. 3, 4 & 5, who were the elected Office-Bearers to act as Secretary, Treasurer & Accountant respectively of the Society. The question in dispute before the Registrar was whether the elected office bearers of the Society could be appointed as Secretary, Treasurer or Accountant of the Society. The stand taken by the O.Ps. before the Registrar was that the Bye-laws of the Society, which was approved in the year 1976, under Clause 24(b) authorised the elected members to elect the Secretary, Treasurer & Accountant from amongst the members of the Society & there was no illegality in the appointment of O.Ps. 3, 4 & 5, as Secretary, Treasurer or Accountant of the Society. The Registrar after hearing both the parties by Order Dated 26.4.2008 (Annexure-4) disposed of the said case holding, inter alia, that neither O.Ps.3, 4 & 5 nor any member of the Committee or Society would act as Secretary, Treasurer or Accountant of the Society. The said Order Dated 26.4.2008 was challenged before the Cooperative Tribunal in T.A. No. 46/2008 by O.Ps. 2 to 13. The said Order Dated 26.4.2008 was challenged before the Cooperative Tribunal in T.A. No. 46/2008 by O.Ps. 2 to 13. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by its Order Dated 2nd August, 2008 holding that even though the Cooperative Societies Act has suffered an amendment more specifically in relation to the provisions in Section 28(2-a)(i)(ii) of the Act, the Bye-laws in question, which is there in existence, shall not become per se illegal or unenforceable unless & until it is amended under the provisions of Section 28(2-a)(i) or (ii) of the Act. 3. After the aforesaid Judgment was passed, the Petitioner filed a review petition being T.R.V. No. 1/2008 before the Cooperative Tribunal indicating therein that the Tribunal while disposing of T.A. No. 46/2008 considered the provisions contained in the unamended Bye-laws, which had already suffered amendment by 3.2.1993. In other words, by the time the appeal of the Society was disposed of by the Tribunal, the Bye-laws had undergone necessary amendment, which was in consonance with the amended provision of Section 16-A of the Act. This aspect has not been disputed by anybody. The statutory provision in this regard is Section 16-A(1)(d) of the Act, which is quoted herein below: Section 16-A- Admission & continuance as members: (1) No person shall be eligible for being admitted or for continuing as a member of a Society if he xxx xxx xxx (d) is a paid employee of the society or its financing bank provided such an employee may be admitted or retained as a nominal member. 4. From the order passed by the Tribunal in appeal, there is nothing to indicate that the fact of amendment of the bye-laws was brought to the notice of the Tribunal. O.Ps.2 to 13 in their counter affidavit have taken a stand as if the" old Bye-laws is continuing. However, when this aspect was brought to the notice of the Tribunal by way of filing a review, the Tribunal rejected the review application on the ground that the order of the Trial Court was reversed as there was no discussion which provision of the Bye-laws contravened which provision of the Act & Rules &, therefore, there was no scope to infer that the Tribunal being misled by one party or the other has based its conclusion on the basis of the submissions made by such party. 5. 5. Fact remains that the entire dispute revolves round one aspect, i.e., whether the elected members can be appointed as Secretary, Treasurer & Accountant, which is prohibited u/s 16-A(1)(d) of the Act. A stand has been taken that it was allowed before, by virtue of a provision in the Bye-laws, which was non-existent on the date when the appeal was filed, & it was brought to the notice of the Tribunal after the appeal was disposed of & the review application was filed on that ground. The Tribunal should have considered the review application as the Appellate order of the Tribunal was based upon wrong provision of the Bye-laws because in paragraphs-6 & 7 of the Appellate order the Tribunal has clearly indicated that: 6. xxx xxx Admittedly, the Bye-laws of the Society came to force on 21.10.1976. 7. xxx xxx Soon after the amendment of the Act & Rules, the provisions of the Bye-laws perse do not become illegal or unenforceable unless & until, it is amended under the provisions of Section 28(2-a)(i) or (ii) of the O.C.S. Act. 6. In view of such, we have no hesitation to say that the Tribunal has failed to review the order, which was passed basing upon wrong provision of the Bye-laws even though the same was brought to its notice. The Tribunal passed the order on the Review Application without any application of mind & in a casual manner without resorting to the provision under which a review can be allowed. 7. During the course of hearing of this Writ Petition, our attention is drawn to the fact that the Bye-laws was amended in the meantime. Paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit filed by O.Ps.2"to 13, which is sworn to by Sri Kailash Chandra Panda, Board of Director of B.I.C. Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., O.P. 13, who was also a signatory to the appeal, reads thus: 4. xxx xxx xxx Further respectfully submitted that, the Bye-law of the society so approved by the registering authority since 21.10.1976 clearly permits vide clause-24 of the Bye-law. & at no point of time the said Bye-law has been challenged. 8. We find that the bye-law has already been amended in the year 1993, as it was brought to our notice. We issued notice to the O.Ps. & at no point of time the said Bye-law has been challenged. 8. We find that the bye-law has already been amended in the year 1993, as it was brought to our notice. We issued notice to the O.Ps. 2 to 13 to show cause as to why criminal proceeding would not be initiated against them for filing false affidavit before this Court. This order was passed on 14.9.2009. In the show cause affidavits of Smt. Bhawani Choudhury, O.P. 7, & Kailash Chandra Panda, O.P. 13, it is stated that the bye-law of the Society was not challenged, literally failing to understand the spirit of the allegations & they also indicated that in the meantime, a person nominated by the Deputy Registrar of the Cooperative Society, has been allowed to join & is working as Secretary of the Society concerned in terms of the amended bye-law & in consonance with Section 16-A of the Act, Similar show cause affidavits have been filed by the notices but the affidavit so filed & the averments made in paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit would show that effort has been made to show before this Court that the Bye-laws dated 21.10.1976 & recourse to Clause 24 thereof was taken into consideration by the Society white appointing the Secretary, Treasurer & Accountant. On the relevant date as mentioned above, Clause-24 of the said Bye-laws was non-existent as the Bye-laws had already been amended & the new Bye-laws that came into existence did not permit the appointment of any member/Director in view of the amendment made in the Act & Rules. In the aforesaid premises, we have no hesitation to hold that the order passed by the Registrar of the Cooperative Society in Annexure-4 is legal, valid & sustainable in the eye of law & accordingly, steps have been taken for compliance of the order. While confirming the order of the Registrar, we set aside the Order Dated 2nd it August, 2008 passed by the Cooperative Tribunal in T.A. No. 46/2008 (Annexure-5) & the Order Dated 23.10.2008 passed by the said Tribunal in T.R.V. No. 1/2008 (Annexure-9). 9. So far as punishment for filing false affidavit is concerned, after hearing Mr. While confirming the order of the Registrar, we set aside the Order Dated 2nd it August, 2008 passed by the Cooperative Tribunal in T.A. No. 46/2008 (Annexure-5) & the Order Dated 23.10.2008 passed by the said Tribunal in T.R.V. No. 1/2008 (Annexure-9). 9. So far as punishment for filing false affidavit is concerned, after hearing Mr. S. Mohapatra, Learned Counsel for the O.Ps., we are of the view that an opportunity to mend themselves & not to commit the same act in future & to be more careful particularly at the time of filing affidavit in this Court, should be given to the notices. Accordingly, we drop the contempt proceeding against the O.Ps. subject to payment of cost of Rs. 1,000 (rupees one thousand) on each of them & the same shall be paid to the High Court Bar Association Welfare Fund. In view of the order, as aforesaid, the proceedihg in 2(C) CC No. 408/2009 pending before the S.D.J.M., Sadar, Cuttack, shall be dropped in accordance with law. C.R. Dash, J. I agree.