Delhi High Court
Narain Dass & Ors. vs The Registrar Of Coop.Societies & ... on 24 February, 2010
Author: Gita Mittal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 9276/2009
Date of decision: 24th February, 2010
NARAIN DASS & ORS. ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Rakesh Tikku, Adv.
versus
THE REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES & ORS.
..... Respondent
Through Mr. B.S. Arora, Adv. for R-2
Mr. Sunil Sabharwal, Adv. for R-4
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to
see the Judgment? No
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the
Digest? No
GITA MITTAL, J(Oral)
1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following
prayers :-
"(a) That your Lordships may be pleased to issue an
appropriate writ of certiorari and/or any other writ
and/or direction of likewise nature, thereby quashing
the impugned communications dated 30.3.2009
(Annexure P-1) and circulars dated 9th April and 14th
April, 2009 (anexure P-2 and Annexure P-3)
respectively. Your Lordships may be further pleased
to hold that the petitioners herein and other similarly
situated members of the Society are not legally liable
to pay said demand of Rs.61,257/- along with or
without any interest and a sum of Rs.10,000/-
claimed as development charges by the respondent
no. 2 and members who have paid Rs.10,000/- as
development charges, may be refunded the same.
(b) Your Lordships may be further pleased to hold
that the petitioners herein as well as the other
similarly situated persons/members who have either
not availed of the loan from respondent nos. 2 and 4
and/or if have availed of the loan but have got No
Due Certificates from the respondent no. 2 are also
entitled to vote as well as contest the elections of the
Managing Committee of the respondent no. 2 slated
for 30.5.2009;
(c) Your Lordships may also be pleased to pass a
writ of mandamus and/or any other writ and/or
direction of likewise nature, thereby directing the
respondent no. 1 to take appropriate action
expeditiously in respect of its order dated 25.5.2001
(annexure P-10_ in terms of which enquiry was
ordered to be conducted against the irregularities on
the part of the then Managing Committee of
misappropriating the funds of respondent no. 2
society and pass appropriate order in that regard in a
time bound manner."
2. An objection has been taken by learned counsel appearing
for the respondent no. 2 society that the prayers made by the
petitioner are not maintainable before this court on the ground
that the petitioner has available alternate efficacious remedy of
dispute redressal by way of proceedings under Section 70 of the
Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003.
3. On consideration of the matter, Mr. Rakesh Tikku, learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner prays for leave to withdraw
the prayers made at serial nos. (a) and (b) of the writ petition with
liberty to invoke the remedy available to the petitioner under
Section 70 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003.
4. The writ petition to the extent of prayers (a) and (b) is
therefore dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is
clarified that there is no expression of opinion on the merits of the
petitioner's contentions by the orders which we are passing today.
5. So far as prayer (c) is concerned, Mr. Tikku contends that the
respondent no. 1 has failed to take action despite the order dated
25th May, 2001 passed by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies
appointing an inquiry officer to examine the conduct of the ex-
office bearers of the managing committee. He submits that prayer
(c) made by the petitioner is, therefore, liable to be granted and
time bound directions are required to be issued to the respondent
no.1 in this regard.
6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2, however,
pointed out that by an order dated 11th December, 2001 Shri
J.S.Sharma was appointed as an Inquiry Officer to conduct an
inquiry under Section 59(1) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act,
1972 into the affairs of the Pharmaceutical Employees Cooperative
Group Housing Society Limited. Our attention has drawn to a
report dated 29th April, 2002 which has been submitted by the said
Mr.J.S.Sharma. Perusal of the inquiry report shows that the inquiry
stands conducted against office bearers of the society.
7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 has pointed
out that the Registrar of Cooperative Societies has acted upon the
inquiry report dated 29th April, 2002 and notice stands issued to
delinquent ex-office bearers of the managing committee of the
society with regard to the faults which has been attributed to them
by the inquiry officer. He however submits that the inquiry officer
has returned a finding that there was no misappropriation of the
funds collected from the members of the society which were
utilised towards bonafide construction purposes.
8. We are not expressing any opinion on the correctness or
illegality of the inquiry report inasmuch as the matter is stated to
be pending before the Registrar of Cooperative Societies.
However, in view of the report dated 29th April, 2002 placed
before us, it would appear that the grievance of the petitioner to
the extent that the inquiry officer has not proceed in the matter is
not justified. The report stands submitted and action thereon has
been already initiated.
9. Our attention is drawn by Mr. Tikku to the order dated 28th
August, 2009 passed by this court permitting the petitioners to
participate in the election process. Mr. Tikku contends that
despite service of the order on the respondents, on 29 th May,
2009, the petitioner were not permitted to participate in elections
which were held on 30th May, 2009.
10. In this regard, Mr. B.S. Arora, learned counsel appearing for
respondent no. 2 has drawn our attention to the election schedule
which had been appointed. The schedule which was notified by
the society for the conduct of elections was as follows :-
S.N Programme Date Timing Venue
o.
1 Issue of Nomination 18/05/09 to 10.00 a.m. to Office of the
Forms (free of cost) 20/05/09 1.00 p.m. Society i.e.
Flat No. B-
Pharma
Aptts.,
2 Filing of Nomination 21/05/09 10.00 a.m. to -do
Forms 1.00 p.m.
3 Scrutiny of Nomination 22/05/09 12.00 noon to -do
Forms 2.00 p.m.
4 Display of list of valid 22/05/09 5.00 p.m. -do-
nominations
5 Withdrawal of 24/05/09 Upto 3.00 p.m. -do-
nominations
6 Display of final list of 24/05/09 5.00 p.m. -do-
contesting candidates
7 Polling, if necessary 30/05/09 10.00 a.m. to IPEX
1.00 p.m. Bhawan, I.P.
Extn., Delhi-
8 Counting 30/05/09 2.00 p.m. Office of the
Society i.e.
Flat No. B-
11. It has further been submitted that only one nomination for
each of the 15 posts was received by the society and consequently
elections to all posts was unanimous and no polling was required.
In this background, we find from the agenda notice dated 23rd
April, 2009 that the respondents had appointed 30th May, 2009 as
the date for "polling, if necessary" and counting of votes.
In view of the above factual position, neither polling nor
counting of any votes was necessary and the objection of the
petitioners that they were not permitted to participate in terms of
the court orders dated 28th May, 2009 in the election process is
misconceived and devoid of legal merit.
In view of the above, nothing survives for adjudication in the
present matter.
This writ petition and all pending applications are
accordingly disposed of.
As and when the petitioner approaches the respondent no.1
with an appropriate proceeding in respect of prayers (a) & (b), we
hope and expect that the same would be expeditiously dealt with
uninfluenced by this order.
GITA MITTAL,J
VIPIN SANGHI, J
FEBRUARY 24, 2010
kr
