[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Ntpc Employees Cooperative Group ... vs Registrar Cooperative Societies And ... on 8 April, 2026
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~53
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 8th April, 2026
Uploaded on: 13th April, 2026
+ W.P.(C) 18454/2025
NTPC EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING
SOCIETY LTD. .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. D.K. Rustogi, Adv.
versus
REGISTRAR COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND ORS.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Shubham Gupta, Counsel for R-3.
Ms. Urvi Mohan, Adv. for
RCS/GNCTD
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
CM APPL. 22321/2026 (for postponement of hearing)
2. This application has been filed by the Petitioners seeking postponement
of hearing of the present writ petition.
3. For the reasons stated in the application as also the fact that the ld.
Counsels for the parties are ready to make submissions today, the application
is allowed and the matter is heard today. Application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 18454/2025
4. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the order dated 26th September,
2025 (hereinafter, 'impugned order') passed by the Respondent No.l-
Registrar Cooperative Societies, Delhi (hereinafter, 'RCS') .
5. The petition was initially titled and filed by NTPC Employees
Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. (hereinafter, 'Society') but was
thereafter, vide order dated 8th January, 2026 amended to reflect three
Petitioners, who were all part of the Managing Committee of the Society. The
said three Petitioners are:
● Mamta Yadav (Erstwhile President)
● Anuj Tyagi (Ex-Secretary)
● Pankaj Monga (Ex. Treasurer)
6. The brief background of the case is that the term of the Managing
Committee of the Society which was earlier elected was to expire on 13th
October, 2022. The Society, sometime in August-September, 2022 had
requested the RCS to appoint a Returning Officer to conduct the elections of
the Managing Committee of the Society. At that time, the RCS had appointed
Sh. Tariq Salam, as a Returning Officer and the elections were conducted and
the Managing Committee of the Society was also duly constituted.
7. On 20th October, 2022, out of the seven members of the Managing
Committee, three members i.e., Vice president, Women MC Member and MC
Member had tendered their resignations. There is stated to be some dispute
that the said resignations were not duly tendered in accordance with the bye-
laws. However, in view of the said resignations, on 12th December, 2022, the
RCS passed an order appointing Shri Mahesh Kumar Gupta, Retd. DANICS,
as an Administrator-cum- Returning Officer under Section 35(5) of the Delhi
Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 (hereinafter, 'DCS Act') to manage the day-
to-day affairs of the Society and to also conduct the elections for the
Managing Committee. This appointment of Mr. Mahesh Kumar Gupta was
challenged by the society in W.P.(C) 17582/2022 titled NTPC Employees
Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. v. Registrar Cooperative Societies
& Ors.
8. In the said writ petition, vide order dated 5th January, 2023, status quo
was granted in the following terms:
"1. Mr. Udit Malik states appropriate shall be that
respondents file counter affidavit within four weeks.
2. Rejoinder be filed within two weeks thereafter.
3. Mr. D. K. Rustagi reiterates his statement as made on
December 22, 2022, on instructions that respondent
No.3 has not taken charge as an Administrator of the
Society till date.
4. In view of above, status quo as of today shall be
maintained till the next date of hearing.
5. List on May 10,2023."
9. After the said status quo order was passed, the said writ petition was
disposed of finally on 13th August, 2025 in the following terms:
"1. As per order dated 12th August 2025, learned
counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 has sought to
canvass that the order impugned appointing an
administrator is sustainable as the same is in tune with
the provisions of Section 35(5) of the Delhi Cooperative
Societies Act 2003 ('DCS Act').
2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1 has
sought to demonstrate from the record that not only has
the petitioner/managing committee acted upon the
resignation submitted by the committee members, which
has resulted in deficiency of quorum, but since the
committee cannot continue, in such an eventuality, in
terms of the Bye-Law No.23, the order impugned can be
justified, thereby appointing an administrator.
3. The submissions made by the learned counsel for
respondent no. 1 are not borne out from the reasons in
the impugned order; rather, the impugned order itself
contains the reasons for exercising the powers under
Section 35(5) of the DCS Act for appointment of
administrator. Respondent no.l is using the pleadings in
the petition to substantiate his order.
4. It is a settled position of law that the authority cannot
borrow reasons from other sources to justify its orders,
unless the reasons can be said to have been mentioned
in the record. Even the record to that effect has also not
been placed before us.
5. In such an eventuality, we are not inclined to accept
the submissions of counsel for respondent no. 1 in
justification of the issuance of the order impugned.
6. However, at this stage, it is brought to our notice that
the issue about dismembering from the petitioner's
society was under consideration in W.P.(C) 11561/2025
titled 'Ajay Jain & Ors. vs. ' Registrar of Cooperative
Societies & Anr. ' The said petition was disposed of by
this Court vide order dated 04th August 2025 with
directions to respondent no.1.
7. The nature of directions issued was for the arbitrator
to look into the claim as regards the members who
allegedly cannot be continued with the petitioner's
society. We have observed in the said order that the
Arbitrator is required to do the same expeditiously.
9. In this background, we deem it appropriate to allow
the present petition, thereby quashing the impugned
order dated 12th December, 2022.
10. The fact remains that vide order of 05th January
2023, this Court permitted the petitioner/managing
committee to continue with status quo as long and as a
sequel thereto, the petitioner/managing committee is
stated to have continued managing the affairs of the
society.
11. We make it clear that, if so required, respondent
no.l shall be at liberty to pass a speaking order in the
matter afresh, having regard to the statutory
provisions as reflected in Section 35 of the DCS Act.
12. The petition stands disposed of with the above
directions.
13. Pending applications stand disposed of.
14. Order be uploaded to the website of this Court."
10. In the meantime, while the status quo order continued, the Managing
Committee of the Society co-opted three other members and issued an
election notice. On 1st August, 2025, the Managing Committee of the Society
had itself appointed Shri Mahesh Kumar Gupta, as a Returning Officer for the
said elections. The agenda notice issued by the said Returning Officer was
also circulated and served upon the RCS. The same reads as under:
Signing Date:13.04.2026
18:28:53
11. After the order dated 13th August, 2025 was passed by this Court and
the agenda notice dated 15th September, 2025 was circulated, the RCS passed
the impugned order dated 26th September, 2025 appointing the Respondent
No.3-Sh. Ram Kumar Savant as Administrator-cum-Returning Officer. The
ground on which the said impugned order has been passed is that there was a
violation of Clause 23(i) of the bye-laws of the Cooperative Group Housing
Society. This order passed by the RCS has been challenged in the present writ
petition. The reliefs sought in the present writ petition is under:
"(a) Issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate
writ or to quash/set aside the order dated 26.09.2025
passed by the respondent no.1 malafidely invoking
section 35 (5) of Delhi cooperative societies act, 2003
and to conduct the election as per the provisions of the
Delhi cooperative societies act, 2003.
(b) Issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction directing the Respondent No. 1
to hold elections of the NTPC Employees CGHS Society
and allow only the members who clear all the dues
including the demand letter of the society dated
10.05.2025 or conversely admit the appointment of an
RO under Rule 53 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies
Act, 2007, Section 35 of the DCS ACT 2003;
(c) pass any other order or direction as this Hon'ble
Court deems fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the present case. "
12. The submission of Mr. D.K. Rustogi, ld. Counsel for the Petitioners is
that the invocation of Clause 23(i) of the bye-laws of the Cooperative Group
Housing Society is completely impermissible in as much as in order dated
13th August 2025 wherein this Court had already made observations in respect
of the said bye-law there was no violation of the said bye-law.
13. It is further submitted by Mr. Rustogi, ld. Counsel that there was no
requirement to pass the impugned order appointing an Administrator-cum-
Returning Officer when the Managing Committee of the Society had itself
appointed a Returning Officer. Ld. Counsel submits that it is only if there is
a violation of Section 35 of the DCS Act, the scheme of Section 35 (5) of the
DCS Act could be invoked by the RCS. Reliance is placed upon the decisions
in W.P.(C) 2589/2010 titled 'The New Friends Co,op House Building
Society Ltd. v. v. Registrar Cooperative Societies & Ors.' where vide order
dated 22nd April, 2010, a Division Bench of this Court had observed as under:
" The provisions of the sub Section 5 of Section 35 of
the said Act come into play in case of failure of the
committee to arrange for elections of the new Committee
before expiry of its term while in the present case the
Committee had made arrangement for holding such
elections, but the election process was thwarted by the
Returning Officer himself.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that they
objection to the appointment of R-4 as the Returning
Officer, but there is no occasion to appoint the
administrator in such a situation where all that is
required to be done has been done by the Society and
the gazetted officer appointed to hold the elections
thwarted the election process in the middle by
suspending the elections instead of deciding the validity
of the objections if any by certain members.
We are in agreement with the submission of the learned
counsel for the petitioner. R-4 has been appointed as the
Returning Officer. He will proceed to conduct elections
expeditiously in accordance with the said Act and Rules
framed thereunder.
The second order dated 09.04.2010 appointing R-3 as
the administrator in the given facts of the case is
quashed."
14. In addition, reliance is also placed upon the order dated 5th December,
2019 in W.P.(C) 12817/2019 titled ' Jamia Cooperative Bank Limited v.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.' wherein, a Division Bench of this Court in
paragraph 18 and 19 had observed as under:
"18. The upshot of the above discussion is that there
is no failure by the outgoing Managing Committee of the
Petitioner society to arrange for election of the new
committe in terms of Section 35 (5) of the DCS Act and,
therefore, the occasion to appoint an Administrator to
the Petitioner society did not arise.
19. Consequently, the impugned order to the extent
that it appoints Mr. Krishnan not just as an RO to
conduct the elections to the new committee, but also as
an Administrator of the Petitioner society is bad in law
and that part of the impugned order appointing him as
Administrator is accordingly set aside. He will, of
course, continue as the RO for the purpose of conduct of
elections to the Managing Committee/Board of
Directors of the Petitioner"
15. On the other hand, Mr. Shubham Gupta, ld. Counsel appearing for the
Administrator-cum-Returning Officer submits that the purpose of passing the
impugned order dated 26th September, 2025 was that out of the entire
Managing Committee of the Society, three members had resigned and the
remaining four members chose to co-opt four further members which is
impermissible. Further, it is submitted that the order dated 13th August, 2025
passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 17582/2022 had permitted the RCS to pass a
speaking order in place of the earlier orders which lacked reasons.
16. Ms. Urvi Mohan, ld. Counsel for the RCS also supports this contention
and submits that vide paragraph 11 of the order dated 13th August, 2025,
speaking order was to be passed by the RCS.
17. This Court heard the counsel for the parties. Firstly, when the status
quo order was passed on 5th January, 2023 by this Court in W.P.(C)
17582/2022 , the Managing Committee, on its own, could not have called for
an election while the said writ petition was pending before this Court.
18. The Managing Committee of the Society had a duty to inform the
Court and take permission of the Court to call for the elections during the
operation of the status quo order.
19. Further, the earlier order dated 12th December, 2022 passed by the
RCS appointing Mr. Mahesh Kumar Gupta as the Administrator-cum-
Returning Officer was under challenge in W.P.(C) 17582/ 2022 and while
passing the final order on 13th August, 2025, the Court had permitted the RCS
to consider the matter as fresh and pass a speaking order. In effect therefore,
the Court also observes in paragraph 10 of the said order that the Managing
Committee of the Society was under a duty to continue with the status quo.
20. Under such circumstances, the power of the RCS to pass a speaking
order was emanating from the order dated 13th August, 2025 passed by the
Court in W.P.(C) 17582/2022. The earlier order dated 5th January, 2023 in the
said writ petition which granted status quo did not permit the Managing
Committee of the Society to call an election and that too without the leave of
the Court.
21. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 26th September, 2025
appointing an Administrator-cum-Returning Officer could not have been
faulted as the RCS was given the permission to pass the speaking order. As
can be seen, the RCS has appointed an independent person namely, Sh. Ram
Kumar Sawant, who has got the elections conducted to the Managing
Committee of the Society. The new Managing Committee has also been
constituted as has been recorded in the previous order dated 27th March, 2026.
22. The short affidavit of the Administrator-cum-Returning Officer has
also been placed on record which would show that the newly elected
Managing Committee of the Society is as under:
"11. It say that in accordance with the elections
schedule, polling was successfully held on 11.01.2026
wherein the following seven members were duly elected
to the Management Committee of the Society:
(a) Mrs. Maneesha Bajpai - President;
(b) Mr. Pawanjit Singh Walia - Vice-President;
(c) Mrs. Pammi - Woman Member;
(d) Mrs. Suman Sharma - Woman Member;
(e) Mr. Ajay Jain - Member;
(f) Mrs. Rina Chopra- Member; and
(g) Mrs Vinod Gupta - Member."
23. At this stage, the Court is also being informed that a petition under
Section 70 of the DCS Act has also been filed being ARB Case No.
117/GH/DR/ARB/2025-26/559-70 challenging the newly elected Managing
Committee as also the elections conducted by the Administrator-cum-
Returning Officer. The next date of hearing in the said petition is stated to be
13th April.
24. The prayers in this writ petition are primarily for conducting of
elections which has now been done in accordance with the report placed by
the Administrator-cum-Returning Officer. Accordingly, the present writ
petition is now infructuous and no further order would be called in the present
writ petition.
25. In so far as the legal issue is concerned, the Managing Committee of
the Society was functioning under the status quo order and therefore, it cannot
be said that the announcement of the elections in September, 2025 by the
Managing Committee was in accordance with Section 35 of the DCS Act.
Under such circumstances the RCS was fully empowered to invoke Section
35 (5) of the DCS Act and appoint an Administrator-cum-Returning Officer
in order to ensure free and fair conduct of elections of the Society.
26. Needless to act that all contentions in respect of the challenged
elections are left open and are not examined by this Court.
27. The writ petition is disposed of along with the pending applications, if
any.
28. The next date of hearing i.e. 10th April, 2026 stands cancelled.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
MADHU JAIN
JUDGE
APRIL 8, 2026/prg/ck
