Subhash Behari Lal & Ors. vs The Registrar Co-Operative ...
2001 Latest Caselaw 505 Del

ORDER

Manmohan Sarin, J.

1. Rule.

With the consent of the parties writ petition is taken up for disposal.

2. Petitioners, three in number, have filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus, directing respondent No. 1 treat the petitioners as members of the Society and to forward their names to respondent No. 3 for draw of lots. Another prayer made is for a direction to respondent No.2, the then administrator, for enrooing the petitioners, as members of the society. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner does no press this prayer, as since then the Administrator has demitted office, elections have been held and the new menaging Committee has taken charge.

3. I have learned counsel for the parties. The short controversy, which arises in this case is with regard to the non-forwarding of names of the petitioners in the list of approved members by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to DDA for purposes of draw of lots.

4. Counsel for the parties submit that this is the sole surviving question for consideration in this writ petition.

5. Mr. V.P.Chaudhary, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that the issue of membership and entitlement to participate in the draw of lots has been unnecessarily kept pending for over a decade. He submits that an elaborate exercise had been undertaken by the Administrator in finalising the members in the waiting list. The matter was a contentious one, Since the members in waiting were 29 against 11 available plots. There were a lot of deliberations and matter received attention of higher functionaries in the Government also. After the elaborate exercise, the Administrator finalized the list, which was approved by the Registrarof Co-operative Societies. Additional affidavit to this effect had been filed by Ms.Sunita Sabharwal, Assistant Registrar in CW.No.2211/96, wherein it has been clearly stated that, "The criteria adopted by the Administrator in preparing the interim and final report had been considered in the light of objections and discussions and the Registrar of Co-operative Societies was of the view that the recommendations of the Administrator be accepted." It is also a part of record that the list, as prepared and finalised, was approved by the Registrar.

6. Mr.V.Shankra submits that the matter ought to be re-verified as there has been a lapse of time and the list should be re-affirmed by the Registrar. This is the only objection raised by Mr.Shankra. I am unable to accept this submission. The mere fact that the matter had been a contentious one and had evaded solution for over a decade, is no ground to seek its re-affirmation and re-confirmation.

7. In these circumstances, I direct that the list, as prepared by Mr.J.N.Gupta, Administrator dated 10.2.1994, after completing such formalities, as are required at law, be submitted to respondent No.3/DDA for the purpose of draw of lots. The Registrar shall submit this list within four weeks from today. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioners would also comply with such formalities, as may be required. Respondent No.3/DDA would also conduct the draw of lots, as expeditiously as possible within three months on receiving the seniority list.

8.The orriginal records of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies received from the file of CW.No.2211/96 be kept with the said writ petition. It would be open for the parties to apply for release of said records by moving an appropriate application in the said writ petition before the concerned Bench.

9. The writ petition stands disposed of.