Judgment : 1. The petitioner, an employee of the 4th respondent, having questioned the resolution dated 10.2.2012 as at Annexure-B of the 4th respondent, in a dispute under S.70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, the 2nd respondent passed an interim order dated 25.6.2012, staying the operation of said resolution. The said interim order of stay, as at Annexure-C has been questioned in R.P.No.68/2012 on the file of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore. An interim order prayed, having not been granted, W.P.No.29459/2012 was filed by the 5th respondent herein. 2. The 2nd respondent having sent a communication dated 5.9.2012 as at Annexure-A to the 3rd respondent to permit the 5th respondent to temporarily lift and distribute the Fair Price Shop food grains of the 4th respondent, this writ petition has been filed to quash the communication as at Annexure-A and for directing respondents 2 and 3 to permit the petitioner to lift the food grains quota of the 4th respondent as its Chief Executive Officer. 3. W.P.No.29459/2012 was disposed of today by a separate order, directing the Tribunal to decide R.P.No.68/2012 expeditiously and within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 4. On behalf of respondents 1 to 3, statement of objections dated 24.11.2012 has been filed on 28.11.2012. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the writ petition record. 6. The impugned communication as at Annexure-A shows that in view of the pendency of the dispute and the revision petition, in public interest, 5th respondent who was appointed as Secretary of the 4th respondent society was permitted to lift the food grains of the Fair Price Shop run by the 4th respondent society. The communication as at Annexure-A makes manifestly clear that it is only a temporary arrangement made by the 2nd respondent, in the interest of the 4th respondent society and the Fair Price Shop card holders. 7. Undeniably, 4th respondent society runs a Fair Price Shop and has an authorization to lift the food grains for distribution to the card holders. Because of the dispute of the petitioner in the matter of appointment of the 5th respondent, the Fair Price Shop Card holders cannot suffer. 7. Undeniably, 4th respondent society runs a Fair Price Shop and has an authorization to lift the food grains for distribution to the card holders. Because of the dispute of the petitioner in the matter of appointment of the 5th respondent, the Fair Price Shop Card holders cannot suffer. In view of the said circumstance, the 2nd respondent requested the 3rd respondent vide Annexure-A to permit the 5th respondent to temporarily lift the food grains of the Fair Price Shop of the 4th respondent society until further orders. 8. Since a time bound direction has been issued to decide R.P.No.68/2012 by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, I do not find justification to interfere with the impugned communication. Any interference with the impugned communication would bring in a stalemate in the matter of lifting of the food grains and the distribution to the card holders of the 4th respondent society. Further, there is no interim order passed in this writ petition which was filed on 30.10.2012. Consequently, on behalf of the 4th respondent, food grains have been lifted and distributed to the card holders by the authorized representative of the 4th respondent society. In the circumstances, the impugned communication though contains the name of the 5th respondent, it has to be construed that the authorized representative of the 4th respondent is only entitled to lift the food grains of the Fair Price Shop and distribute the same to the card holders. Annexure-A has to be read and treated accordingly. In the result, writ petition is disposed of by making it clear that the mentioning of the name of the 5th respondent in Annexure-A shall be treated temporary authorization by the 4th respondent. In case, the interim order as at Annexure-C becomes final, the 2nd respondent shall send a modified communication, in place of Annexure-A. For all practical purposes, for the present, the person whomsoever lifts the food grains from the depot and distributes to the card holders, shall be construed as the authorized representative of the 4th respondent society and not in their individual capacity. No costs.