Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 15913/2023
IFUNA CO-OPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETIES LTD. ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vikas Goyal
OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Satyakam, ASC for GNCTD
Date of Decision: 23rd February, 2024
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
JUDGMENT
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Accordingly, this application is disposed of.
1. The present review petition has been filed seeking review of the order dated 06th February, 2024, passed by this Court dismissing the writ petition on merits in view of the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in T.N. Haokip v. Registrar, Co-operative Societies & Ors.1.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner-applicant states that the Respondent No.2 failed to produce any documentary proof of her residence in Delhi as required under Section 8 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 1972 (‘Act of 1972’) and the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 1973 (‘1973 Rules’) framed thereunder. He states that Respondent No.2 had applied for membership of Petitioner society on 10th July, 1986 and the same was duly approved by the Petitioner’s managing committee on 18th July,
1986. He states that however, the then Registrar of Co-operative Societies (‘RCS’) vide order dated 14th May, 1990, declined to approve the Respondent No.2’s membership as she had failed to provide proof of domicile in Delhi. He states that subsequently, in the order dated 27th March, 2009, passed by the RCS and the order dated 29th August, 2023, passed by the Financial Commissioner, the said authorities had failed to take into consideration the applicable law as it existed in the year 1986 and had erroneously declared Respondent No.2’s membership as valid.
2.1. He states that the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in T.N. Haokip (supra) is inapplicable and distinguishable as in the said judgment, the member therein had applied for membership in the year 2003 i.e., when Section 8 of the Act of 1972, as it existed in the year 1986, was not applicable. He states that therefore, in the facts of the aforesaid judgment, the Court came to the opinion that as on 2003, there was no requirement for the applicant therein to be a resident of NCT of Delhi.
3. We have considered the submission of the learned counsel for the 2022 SCC OnLine Del 1360 Petitioner-applicant and perused the record.
4. The Petitioner has referred to Section 8 of the Act of 1972 to contend that in the relevant year i.e., in 1986, the requirement for an applicant to be domiciled in Delhi is present. The said contention of the Petitioner is exfacie untenable as no such condition of domicile is prescribed under Section 8 of the Act of 1972 which reads as under:
5. The Section 8 of the Act of 1972 does not prescribe the conditions to be complied with for approval of membership and the said conditions are set out in the 1973 Rules. The Financial Commissioner in the impugned order dated 29th August, 2023, has referred to Rule 24 of the 1973 Rules as it existed in the year 1986 and rightly concluded that as per the said applicable rule, there was no requirement for the applicant of a cooperative society for being domiciled in Delhi. The Rule 24 of 1973 Rules is relevant and reads as under:
6. The finding of the Financial Commissioner in the impugned order dated 29th August, 2023, is therefore in conformity with the Rules as they existed in the year 1986 and he has rightly upheld the validity of the membership of Respondent No. 2. The Petitioner-applicant has failed to place before this Court any provision of the Act of 1972 or the 1973 Rules to substantiate its plea that the Respondent No.2 was not eligible for membership.
7. For the sake of completion, it may be noted that Rule 24 of the 1973 Rules was amended vide notification dated 22nd April, 1997 and a clause (v) was inserted as Rule 24(1)(v), prescribing the mandatory provision of residence in Delhi. The said clause (v) reads as – (v) in case of a Cooperative Housing Society he has been a resident of the National Capital Territory of Delhi for a minimum period of three years at the time of applying for a membership in such society. However, in T.N. Haokip (supra)2 the Coordinate Bench after perusing the record has concluded that the said notification dated 22nd April, 1997, was never published in the Gazette and thus, did not come into force. This position in fact and law is not disputed by the standing counsel for RCS who relied upon the judgment of T.N. Haokip (supra) during the hearings on 12th December, 2023 and 06th February, 2024.
8. The contention of the Petitioner that the facts arsing for consideration before the Coordinate Bench T.N. Haokip (supra) pertain to the year, 2003, is also of no avail as in the facts of that case the petitioner therein became a member of the society on 30th September, 2003 and the Division Bench upheld the said members’ membership on the anvil of the provisions of Act of 1972 and 1973 Rules. In fact, the Division Bench at paragraphs 14 and 15 of the said judgment categorically opined that the provisions of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 and the Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 2007 came into effect subsequently in the year 2005 and 2007 respectively and were therefore inapplicable to decide eligibility of a member enrolled on 30th September, 2003.
9. In the aforementioned facts, therefore, the Petitioner-applicant has failed to show any error in the impugned orders dated 29th August, 2023 passed by the Financial Commissioner and 27th March, 2009 passed by the RCS. For the same reasons, there is no error in the order dated 06th February, 2024 passed by this Court.
10. In view of the aforesaid observations, the present review petition is without any merits and is accordingly, dismissed.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J FEBRUARY 23, 2024/msh/aa Paragraphs 12, 14 and 15