Kulwant Singh Tiwana, J. - (1.) The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are that Rattan Singh, Respondent No. 4, had been serving on the Managing Committee of the Jhajjar Primary Co -operative Land Development Bank Ltd., Jhajjar (hereinafter referred as the Committee) for more than a period of six years. He on that account could not continue on the Committee as he had earned disqualification because of the provisions of Sec. 26C(2) of the Punjab Co -operative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) and under Rule 26 of the Punjab Co -operative Societies Rules 1963, hereinafter referred as the Rules as applicable to the State of Haryana. The Petitioners after assuring themselves of the disqualification of Respondent No. 4 applied to Respondent No. 2, for his, Respondent No. 4, removal from the membership of the Committee On receipt of the report of the Assistant Registrar, Respondent No. 2, declined to accept the prayer of the Petitioners on the ground that at the time of reelection of Respondent No. 4, his period was 18 days less than six years and he was eligible for election.
(2.) The Petitioners under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India have filed d this writ petition seeking the removal of Respondent No. 4, with immediate effect as he had ceased to be a Director of the Jhajjar Primary Co -operative Land Development Bank Ltd. Jhajjar (hereinafter referred as the 'Bank') and also for quashing Annexure P. 2 the order of Respondent No. 2.
(3.) Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 raised a preliminary objection that since Respondent No. 4 had been elected, the Petitioners should have resorted to the remedy of election petition. It was stated that Respondent No. 4 remained a Director of the Bank from 2nd of April, 1972 to 14th of March, 1978 and according to this calculation his term was short by 18 days. On merits they contested the petition on the ground that since Respondent No. 4 was eligible for re -election, as he had not completed the total term of six years on the day, he was, therefore, entitled to continue for the full term after election. Respondent No. 4 also filed a written statement on similar lines as adopted by Respondents No. 1 and 2. No arguments were addressed on the preliminary objection.;