ORDER : A.S. Bopanna, J. Learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondents 1 to 3 and file memo of appearance in four weeks. Notice to respondent 4 in the instant petition is not necessary keeping in view the nature of the prayer made and also taking note of the fact the that third respondent in any event will have to provide further opportunity to the fourth respondent in the proceedings and thereafter come to the conclusion in accordance with law. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking issue of mandamus to respondents 1 to 3 to hold inquiry under Section 109 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 for misusing the loans. 3. The petitioner through the representation dated 10-7-2015 had made certain allegations against the fourth respondent. The said complaint made by the petitioner had been taken note by the third respondent and a notice dated 24-8-2015 was issued to the fourth respondent as also to the petitioner. By the said notice, the hearing date was indicated as 3-9-2015. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite such notice being issued, no further process has been made in the enquiry and a final conclusion has not been reached. In that view, the petitioner is before this Court seeking issue of mandamus to conclude the proceedings. 4. As noticed, the complaint made by the petitioner has been entertained and a notice has been issued. Since the third respondent is yet to take decision in the matter, this Court need not advert to the nature of allegations made by the petitioner. All that is necessary to be directed herein is the that third respondent shall issue a fresh notice to the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent, fix the hearing date and thereafter proceed with the matter in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible but in any event the consideration shall be completed within the outer limit of four months. All contentions on the merits are left open. The petition is accordingly disposed of.