ORDER : Aravind Kumar, J. 1. I have heard the arguments of learned Advocates. Perused the records and by consent of learned Advocates writ petitions are taken up for final disposal. Petitioners being aggrieved by order dated 29-4-2015 passed by 1st respondent appointing an Administrator to 4th respondent-Association Annexure-A has filed these writ petitions contending inter-alia that same is violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(c) of Constitution of India and Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (for short 'Act'). 2. Petitioners have contended that Act does not mandate that an association or society registered under the Act is to be renewed and it only mandates that such society registered under the Act is required to furnish balance sheet, statement of audited account of income and expenditure and also list of members of governing body after every annual general meeting and 4th respondent-Association has been filing aforestated documents before 3rd respondent immediately after every annual general meeting and as such impugned order holding that society had not been renewed is without any statutory force and in view of same Administrator cannot be appointed on that ground. Hence, petitioners 1 and 2 being office-bearers and 3rd petitioner being Member of 4th respondent-Association have sought for quashing of order dated 29-4-2015 appointing Administrator to 4th respondent-Association. 3. 3rd respondent has filed statement of objections supporting the impugned order and contending inter-alia that petitioners have no locus standi to file the writ petitions and on account of complaint received against 4th respondent-Association that it had committed serious acts of omission and commission, an enquiry came to be initiated and it was found in enquiry there has been non-compliance of mandatory provisions of the Act viz., Sections 11,12 and 13 of the Act and as such there was no need for issuing any notice to the 4th respondent-Association or to any other persons prior to appointment of Administrator. It is contended that subsequent to enquiry report submitted by Enquiry Officer as per Annexure-G, 3rd respondent-District Registrar of Societies forwarded the report to 1st respondent and recommended for appointing an Administrator by communication dated 29-1-2015-Annexure-H and as such 1st respondent in exercise of power vested under Section 27-A of the Act has appointed an Administrator to 4th respondent-Association for a period of six months and there is no infirmity in the said order whatsoever. Hence, respondents have prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions. 4. Hence, respondents have prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions. 4. Perusal of the records would indicate that petitioners 1 and 2 are the Joint Secretaries of 4th respondent-Association and 3rd petitioner is a member of 4th respondent-Association and he is also Vice-President of Kho Kho Federation of India which is the parent body of 4th respondent-Association. 5th respondent herein is said to have filed a complaint before 3rd respondent alleging certain irregularities in the working of 4th respondent-Association as per Annexure-D. Based on said complaint third respondent initiated enquiry and issued notice to 4th respondent-Association. The Headquarters Assistant, Office of the District Registrar, Gandhinagar, Bengaluru had been appointed as Enquiry Officer to enquire into the allegations made by complainant. 3rd respondent issued notice on 28-12-2011 to 4th respondent-Association. During the course of enquiry 2nd petitioner has appeared on behalf of 4th respondent-Association and has filed the copies of balance sheet, statement of audited accounts of income and expenditure of association and also the list of members of governing body as was filed before 3rd respondent from 1975-2010 vide Annexure-F. Enquiry Officer on perusal of records has submitted a report on 21-6-2014 Annexure-G. Said Enquiry Officer who conducted enquiry into the allegations made in the complaint has arrived at a conclusion that allegations made against 4th respondent-Association of not having submitted the records is not proved by complainant; it is also held that complainant was fully aware of the audited balance sheet, income and expenditure accounts of 4th respondent-Association for the past 15 years and as such held there was no material to establish that there has been any infraction in conducting the affairs of 4th respondent-Association. Despite such finding having been arrived at by Enquiry Officer, he has opined that 4th respondent namely association and its office-bearers have not been able to establish or prove that the contents of complaint is false and he has further opined that there is no material to show that association which was registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act as having been renewed from time to time the delegatee of 3rd respondent has neither enquired into the requirement of annual renewal of 4th respondent-Association nor he has called upon 4th respondent to offer its explanation if any for its non-renewal every year. Said report having been forwarded by 3rd respondent to 1st respondent, 1st respondent has intimated 2nd respondent to tender its opinion as to whether a Administrator has to be appointed to 4th respondent-Association and called upon the 2nd respondent to submit a report in this regard by communication dated 24-2-2015 Annexure-J. On account of alleged report submitted by 2nd respondent on 2-3-2015 to 1st respondent impugned order dated 29-4-2015 Annexure-A appointing Administrator to 4th respondent-Association came to be passed by 1st respondent. It requires to be noticed at this juncture itself that enquiry came to be conducted by delegatee of 3rd respondent was based on a complaint given by 5th respondent and based on said enquiry conducted in exercise of power vested under Section25 of Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 report dated 21-6-2014 Annexure-G came to be submitted by the Enquiry Officer, who has clearly opined that contents of complaint is far from truth. In other words he has concluded that documents produced by the 4th respondent-Association would clearly establish that there is no merit in the allegations made by 5th respondent against 4th respondent-Association. It has been recorded by Enquiry Officer in his report to the following effect: 5. Despite having recorded above said finding Enquiry Officer has deviated from his own finding and has jumped to a conclusion that 4th respondent-Association has failed to prove that the contents of complaint is false and thereby shifted the burden on 4th respondent-Association and its committee of members to prove the negative. It is an erroneous finding and contrary to finding recorded by Enquiry Officer in his report dated 21-6-2014, Annexure-G. 6. Undisputedly 1st respondent has exercised power under Section 27-A of the Act to appoint an Administrator to 4th respondent-Association based on the report of Enquiry Officer dated 21-6-2014 Annexure-G. When said report itself does not even remotely suggest that contents of complaint has been proved or in other words complaint itself being merit-less 3rd respondent could not have jumped to a conclusion that Association (4th respondent) had not obtained renewal of its registration without any material available before it. As such based on said report 1st respondent could not have passed impugned order, that too without complying with principles of natural justice. As such based on said report 1st respondent could not have passed impugned order, that too without complying with principles of natural justice. After receipt of report, Annexure-G from Enquiry Officer through 3rd respondent, 1st respondent ought to have extended an opportunity to 4th respondent-Association to reply to said report and only after hearing 4th respondent or its office-bearers or its authorised representative, 1st respondent could have taken steps to pass impugned order. Thus, viewed from any angle impugned order cannot be sustained, inasmuch as basis for passing the impugned order being report of the District Registrar dated 21-6-2014 Annexure-G and said report not indicating about any lapse having occurred in the functioning of 4th respondent-association. Before passing the impugned order 1st respondent having not issued notice to the petitioners or 4th respondent-Association, it has to be necessarily held as violative of principles of natural justice. For these myriad reasons petitions has to succeed. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER 1. Writ petitions are hereby allowed. 2. Order No. KoE 19 MuNoSo 2015, dated 29-4-2015 Annexure-A passed by 1st respondent is hereby quashed. 3. It is needless to state that if 3rd respondent were to find that 4th respondent-Association or its office-bearers have violated any of the provisions of Karnataka Societies Registration Act or Rules made thereunder it would be at liberty to take steps or action in accordance with the provisions of the Act.