ORDER : The 5th respondent-Bank, is a Cooperative Bank, which is managed by a managing Committee which is elected from it’s members. As the term of the then Managing committee was expiring on 05.08.2022, a General Body Meeting of the 5th respondent was conducted on 28.03.2022 and a resolution was passed empowering the existing Managing Committee to conduct elections for the next Managing Committee. 2. The Managing Committee appointed an election officer, who issued a notification in Form-I vide Rc.No.E.O.3/2002 dated 09.07.2022 for conducting elections. Initially, 25 persons had filed their nominations for the posts of 11 Directors. Later, 14 of the nominations were withdrawn and only 11 nominations were left and all eleven of them were declared as elected on 25.07.2022. The Petitioners contend that all the steps taken by the managing committee and the election officer, were informed to the 4th respondent. After the election, the new managing committee took charge and were running the 5th Respondent bank. 3. This election was challenged by one of the members of the 5th respondent by way of E.O.P.No.42 of 2022 filed before the A.P. Cooperative Tribunal, Vijayawada. The 4th respondent, who was a party to in this petition took the stand that while the 5th respondent could conduct its election, as per Rule 22 (1) (a) of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1964 (for short ‘the Rules’) the same was not permissible as bye-law No.29 of the 5th respondent required the Cooperative Department to conduct the elections, and as such the entire election is illegal. 4. In a parallel move, the 4th respondent issued proceedings in Rc.No.827/2022 dated 26.08.2022, ostensibly under Section 32 (7)(a)(i) of the Act, appointing a Member Committee as person-in-charge for managing the affairs of the 5th respondent-Bank, on the ground that the term of the Managing Committee had expired on 05.08.2022 and election process had not been conducted as per the bye-laws. 5. Two of the superseded Directors, have filed W.P.No.27595 of 2022 and three other directors have filed W.P.No.27569 of 2022 challenging the order dated 26.08.2022. 6. Heard Sri K. Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W,.P.No.27569 of 2022; Sri G. Venkateswara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.27595 of 2022; the learned Government Pleader for Cooperation and Sri C. Raghu, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 7th respondent. 7. 6. Heard Sri K. Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W,.P.No.27569 of 2022; Sri G. Venkateswara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.27595 of 2022; the learned Government Pleader for Cooperation and Sri C. Raghu, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 7th respondent. 7. The contentions of the petitioners are: – a) Rule 22 (1)(a) of the Rules stipulates that the election to the Committee of a society, which does not receive State Aid, under Section 43, can be conducted either by the incumbent Managing Committees or request the Registrar of Cooperative Societies to conduct elections on their behalf. b) Bye-law 29 of the bye-laws of the 5th respondent-Bank, does not stipulate that only the co operative department can conduct the election and the same can be seen from the translation of the said bye law which reads as follows: “The election to the Managing Committee, President and Vice-President of Cooperative Societies shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964.” d) Section 32(7)(a)(i) is applicable only when there is no existing Managing Committee and there is a need to appoint a person-in-charge Committee to look after the affairs of the Cooperative Society. As there is an existing, duly elected, Managing Committee, the 4th respondent cannot pass any order under Section 32(7)(a)(i) of the Act. 8. Sri C. Raghu, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 7th respondent would submit that in the earlier rounds of election, the 5th respondent-Bank had always requested the Registrar of Cooperative Societies to conduct the election and there is no discretion to the earlier Managing Committee or the General Body to conduct elections on their own. The elections conducted by the earlier committee are void. In such circumstances, the view of the 4th respondent that there is no Managing Committee, is appropriate and cannot be objected to. Once there is no Managing Committee, the 4th respondent would be entitled to pass an order under Section 32(7)(a)(i) of the Act. 9. Sri C. Raghu, learned Senior Counsel appearing for 7th respondent contends that it is true that the provisions of Section 31-A(8) of the Act stipulates that elections are to be conducted as per the bye-laws. Once there is no Managing Committee, the 4th respondent would be entitled to pass an order under Section 32(7)(a)(i) of the Act. 9. Sri C. Raghu, learned Senior Counsel appearing for 7th respondent contends that it is true that the provisions of Section 31-A(8) of the Act stipulates that elections are to be conducted as per the bye-laws. The only bye-law, of the 5th respondent relating to the subject of elections, is bye-law No.29, which again states that the election would be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In the absence of bye-laws prescribing the procedure, no election can be conducted until and unless the bye-laws are amended to provide for a procedure. He contends that in the absence of such an amendment and in the absence of any procedure under the bye-laws, any election held for the 5th respondent-bank would be void. 10. The learned Government Pleader for Cooperation contends that as per bye-law 29, the Managing Committee has no power to appoint the Election Officer and as such the entire election process is invalid and there is at present no Managing Committee for the 5th respondent-Bank. 11. The Government had issued the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1964 under the provisions of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, for regulating the affairs of the Cooperative Societies in the State. Rule 22 of the said Rules stipulates that the election to the Managing Committee of a cooperative society, which does not obtain financial aid from the State, under Section 43 of the Act, has the option of either conducting the election by its own or seek the assistance of the Registrar to conduct the election. The fact that Rule 22 also requires the Cooperative Society to pay fees to the Registrar for conducting the election would go to show that the Registrar of Cooperative Societies is at best a nominee of the Managing Committee and he has no statutory right or authority to insist that only the Registrar should conduct the election. 12. The Act and the Rules, mentioned above stipulate that the election had to be held according to the bye-laws. In turn, the bye-law of the 5th respondent-bank provides that election should be held in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The vicious cycle of referring to each other between the rules and the bye laws can be broken by two methods. In turn, the bye-law of the 5th respondent-bank provides that election should be held in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The vicious cycle of referring to each other between the rules and the bye laws can be broken by two methods. The first would be the method suggested by Sri C. Raghu, that is to amend the bye laws. The second would be to follow the procedure set out in the Act and the Rules. 13. Sri K. Chidambaram learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the procedure for conduct of election has been set out under Rule 22. This procedure has been followed by the election officer. He draws the attention of this Court to pages 20, 21, 23 and 35 of W.P.No.27569 of 2022. These pages contained the election notification, the schedule given for the conduct of the election and declaration of results. These documents show that the election has been held strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules. 14. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the election can be conducted by the earlier committee, in terms of Rule 22, as the 5th respondent does not obtain any financial assistance from the Government. The Election has been conducted in accordance with the procedures set out in rule 22 and cannot be treated as a void election by the 4th respondent. Accordingly, the finding of the 4th respondent, in the impugned order, that there is no elected Managing Committee in existence, due to which a person-in-charge Committee has been set up, has no legs to stand on. I am of the further view that, in view of the existing Managing Committee, the exercise of power under Section 32 (7)(a)(i) of the Act would not arise in the present case. 15. Various issues were raised as to the manner in which the election has been conducted and Sri C. Raghu, learned Senior Counsel has also taken the stand that the entire exercise has been conducted in a clandestine manner which requires the 4th respondent to intervene. 16. I am afraid that this contention cannot be accepted as there is a provision in the Act that election petitions can be filed in case of such irregularities. In fact an election petition had already been filed and is pending before the Tribunal. 16. I am afraid that this contention cannot be accepted as there is a provision in the Act that election petitions can be filed in case of such irregularities. In fact an election petition had already been filed and is pending before the Tribunal. It is further clarified that the observations of this court, in these proceedings, would not be binding on the election tribunal, to the extent of facts relating to the conduct of the elections and whether the election was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules. 17. In the circumstances, these writ petitions are allowed setting aside the proceedings in Rc.No.827/2022 dated 26.08.2022 issued by the 4th respondent. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.