Delhi High Court
Delhi Union Of Journalists Coop. ... vs Registrar Of Coop. Socy. And Ors. on 5 August, 2002
Author: Khan
Bench: B Khan, J Kapoor
JUDGMENT
Khan, J.
1. As many as 12 members were expelled by
petitioner society vide General Body Resolution dated
18.12.1997. R-3 was one of them. The society
thereafter sought approval of Registrar to the expulsion
of defaulting members who by order dated 5.3.1998
granted opportunity to 9 such members to make good their
default to enable them to avoid their expulsion. He,
however, confirmed expulsion of R-3 along with other two
on the ground that they had failed to appear despite
repeated notices and had not paid any dues for number of
years by ex-parte order dated 5.3.1998.
2. R-3 filed a revision against this before
Financial Commissioner which was allowed in a manner of
sorts vide order dated 11.12.1999. The Financial
Commissioner in his order found that Registrar had
failed to record a finding on service of R-3 by
registered post or otherwise. He also found that the
society had not enrolled any new member in his place and
on his granted his respondent one final opportunity to
make the due payment within 15 days failing which his
expulsion would be deemed confirmed.
3. Petitioner society is aggrieved of this order
and has filed this petition on variety of grounds. The
substance of its grievance, however, is that Financial
Commissioner had exceeded his jurisdiction under Section
80 of the Act while passing this order. It is explained
that the society had issued as many as 25 notices to
this respondent asking him to deposit his dues and to
discharge his outstanding liability of Rs. 5,01,829/- but
he had failed resulting in his expulsion.
4. The said stand of R-3, on the other hand, is that
Registrar had failed to give him equal treatment qua
other defaulting members whom he had granted opportunity
to make good their default.
5. We find it unnecessary to dilate on the extent
of revisional power enjoyed by Financial Commissioner
under Section 80 of the Act and to rule whether he could pass the
impugned direction in his revisional jurisdiction to
facilitate a defaulting member to make good the default
at the last minute when his expulsion was confirmed by
the Registrar. This is so because we feel that R-3 had
received a raw deal from the Registrar who had confirmed
his expulsion in ex-parte proceedings. This should have
persuaded Financial Commissioner to remand the matter to
him requiring to hear R-3 and to consider giving him
a similar treatment as was given to other defaulting
members. But that was not to be. Instead he had taken
upon himself to grant him final opportunity of 15 days
to make good the default which has triggered this
avoidable controversy.
6. We accordingly deem it just and appropriate to
dispose of this petition by the following order:-
"Financial Commissioner's ordered dated
11.2.1999 shall stand set aside. Expulsion
proceedings against R-3 shall revive before
Registrar who shall reconsider his case keeping
in regard the treatment given to other defaulting
members by his order dated 5.3.1998 and pass
appropriate orders in the matter within three
months from the date of appearance of parties
before him and after hearing them. Nothing said
in this order or that of Financial Commissioner
shall have any bearing in passing such orders.
Meanwhile, statement made by L/C for petitioner
Mr. Sethi, as reflected in order dated 10.10.2000,
shall remain intact till such orders are passed."
Parties to appear before Registrar on 20th
August, 2002.
