RAVI SHANKAR CGHS LTD vs REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES
$~47
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 9th April, 2025
+ W.P.(C) 4406/2025
RAVI SHANKAR CGHS LTD. …..Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pradeep Jain, Mr. Sambhav Jain and Mr. Pranav Raj Singh, Advs. (M:9899152568)
versus
REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES …..Respondent
Through: Mr. Sameer Vashisht, Standing Counsel (Civil), GNCTD with Mr. Manashwy Jha & Ms. Harshita Nathrani, Advs. with Ms. Suman Bansal, Asst. Registrar and Mr. Ankush Manu, ASO in person.
Ms. Manika Tripathy, Standing Counsel for DDA.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner-Ravi Shanker CGHS Ltd. (hereinafter Society) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to direct the Respondent-Registrar of Cooperative Societies (hereinafter RCS) to forward the list of 142 approved members to the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter DDA), for draw of lots and allocation of Flats without waiting for the outcome of Rule 90 proceedings under the Delhi Cooperative Society Rules, 2007.
3. In the present case the Court notices that the Society was formed way back in 1st October, 1983 when it was granted registration. The land was allotted to the Society for the construction of flats by the DDA in Sector 13, Plot No.2, Dwarka, New Delhi – 110078 on 3rd November, 1999. Various objections were raised by the authorities and finally, after obtaining all the requisite approvals, construction of 150 flats was commenced. The same was completed in the year 2019. Occupancy-cum-Completion certificates were also issued on 17th October, 2022.
4. Since then, the flats remain unoccupied and the matter continues to remain pending before the RCS for verification of the members and subsequent forwarding of recommendations to DDA for conduct of draw of lots and allotment.
5. The Society has been forced to file various proceedings including a writ petition, being W.P.(C) 5666/2024, and a subsequent contempt case, being CONT.CAS(C) 1314/2024, before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 24th April, 2024 in which the Coordinate Bench of this Court, upon considering the matter, had directed the Committee constituted under Rule 90 of the Delhi Cooperative Society Rules, 2007 (hereinafter Rule 90 Committee) to complete the verification of members and send their recommendations to the RCS within a period of 3 months thereafter. Upon non-compliance of the said direction, the Society preferred CONT.CAS(C) 1314/2024 which is now stated to be pending before the ld. Single Judge.
6. Mr. Pradeep Jain, ld. Counsel for the Society has submitted that under Section 77 of the Delhi Co-Operative Societies Act, 2003 (hereinafter DCS Act), the Registrars approval would, in fact, not be required in the present case as the amendment which requires the prior approval of the Committee from the RCS, was introduced only in 2006 and came into effect on 13th January, 2007. Therefore, it is submitted that the DDA in this case can proceed to conduct the draw of lots.
7. In response to this contention, ld. Standing Counsel for RCS Mr. Sameer Vashisht submits that the issue was, in fact, raised by the Petitioner in the contempt proceedings, wherein the ld. Single Judge, after due consideration, still directed the RCS to proceed with the verification process. He places reliance on the order dated 25th March, 2025 passed in CONT.CAS(C) 1314/2024.
8. On the last date i.e., 7th April 2025, this Court had, after considering the matter, directed the competent officials from the office of RCS to be present along with the complete file. In addition, notice was also issued to Ms. Manika Tripathi, ld. Standing Counsel for the DDA for appearance in the matter.
9. Mr. Sameer Vashisht, ld. Counsel for the RCS has appeared today along with some officials from the RCS office, who submit that Registrar, RCS had issued its clearance on 12th September, 2023. However, the Rule 90 Committee subsequent to such clearance had found some anomalies in the documents based on which the clearance was issued. Even a Sub-Committee was constituted to look into the said anomalies. Therefore, it is these anomalies, according to them, that is the cause of delay. In this regard, Mr. Vashisht further submits that a time frame may be fixed, if needed, for the completion of work by the Rule 90 Committee.
10. On behalf of the DDA, it is submitted that presently in terms of Section 77 of the DCS Act, there are two stages of verification, first by Rule 90 Committee and secondly, by RCS.
11. Mr. Pradeep Jain, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner, on the other hand, submits that the Rule 90 committee verification is not required in this case in terms of Rule 19(3) and (4) of the Delhi Cooperative Society Rules (hereinafter DCS Rules) which was notified by the Honble Lieutenant Governor vide RCS/Policy/07/6728 dated 30th July, 2008. Elaborating upon it ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the requirement of Rule 90 Committee verification was introduced vide the amendment to Section 77 of the DCS Act dated 13th January, 2007. However, for the purpose of clarifying the applicability of this amendment to members who had enrolled prior to 2007, the Honble Lieutenant Governor notified the said Rules on 30th July, 2008. It exempts members who were enrolled to their concerned societies prior to 2nd July, 2007 from the requirement and clarifies that their membership can be regularised even in the absence of the verification by Rule 90 Committee. He further contends that the submitted list of members of the Society would show that 147 out of 148 members have obtained membership prior to 30th July, 2008, and only one member has obtained membership on 11th June, 2023. The complete list of members submitted by Mr. Jain is taken on record.
12. Heard ld. Counsels for the parties and perused the record. The Society has constructed 150 flats at substantial expense. Admittedly, the flats have not been occupied yet due to the non-allocation of the flats to the concerned members. Under such circumstances, in the previous round, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed in W.P.(C) 5666/2024 titled Ravi Shankar CGHS Ltd. v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Anr. vide order dated 8th July 2024, as under:
1. Present application has been filed under Section 151, CPC seeking to set aside/recall the order dated 24th April, 2024 and to further direct the petitioner to implead the applicants as respondents to the present writ petition.
2. Vide order dated 24th June, 2024, the present writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Committee constituted under Rule 90 of the DCS Rules, 2007 to process and recommend the names of the 142 members of the petitioner-society to respondent no.2-DDA for draw of lots in accordance with law.
3. Learned senior counsel for the applicants states that the applicants are victims of fraud perpetrated by one, Mr. Praveen Bhutani, who claimed to be the person in-charge of membership of the petitioner-society. He states that membership fee was collected partly in cash and partly by way of cheque on behalf of the Society in 2003. However, neither any receipts/documents were delivered to the applicants nor was membership confirmed in favour of the applicants.
4. He states that the applicants lodged several complaints against the petitioner-society and its Managing Committee including the complaints before the RCS and an FIR No.138/2014, PS EOW with the Economic Offences Wing. He states that vide order dated 31st August, 2023, RCS dismissed the claims filed by the applicants, against which, Civil Revision No.308/2023 is currently pending before the Financial Commissioner of Delhi. He states that the said proceeding is being repeatedly adjourned.
5. Keeping in view the fact the RCS has dismissed the claims of the applicants, this Court is of the view that the applicants are not entitled to any relief at this stage, from this Court. However, to balance the equities, this Court directs the Financial Commissioner to decide and dispose of the Civil Revision filed by the applicants as expeditiously as possible preferably on the next date of hearing i.e. 18th July, 2024 itself or at any other earlier date. With the aforesaid directions, present application is disposed of. The rights and contentions of all the parties are left open.
The Rule 90 Committee thereafter considered the matter and has raised certain objections. The submissions made by the officials of RCS today before the Court would show that the Rule 90 Committee may take much longer to complete its verification procedure. This shows that there is merit in the Petitioners contention regarding the delay by the office of the RCS.
13. Insofar as the contention about the exemption of Petitioner-Society members from the Rule 90 Committee verification requirement is concerned, the relevant provisions are extracted below:
Section 77 of the DCS Act post-amendment:
77. (1) Allotment of plots of land, flats, houses or other dwelling units shall be made by the committee of a co-operative housing society to the members strictly on the basis of draw of lots only in respect of such members whose enrolment as a member of a co-operative housing society is found proper in accordance with the provisions of this Act, rules framed thereunder and the bye-laws of the co- operative housing [by the Registrar with the prior approval of a committee as prescribed]1 and such a draw of lot shall be conducted by the lessor of the land in accordance with the terms and conditions of lease.
(2) If any draw of lot is held in violation of the above provisions it shall be void and any financial loss on account of this shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue from persons who were responsible for it and such persons shall be debarred from holding any office in the co-operative housing society in future.
(3) Every member of a co-operative housing society, whether registered before or after the commencement of this Act, to whom plots of lands, flats, houses or other dwelling units have been allotted, shall be issued certificate of occupancy by the co-operative housing society under its seal and signature in such form, on such terms and on such conditions as may be prescribed and such certificate shall be issued forthwith when all the dues as may be determined and notified by the co-operative housing society are duly paid by the member.
Rule 19(3) and (4) of the Delhi Cooperative Society Rules, 1973 notified vide RCS/Policy/07/6728 dated 30th July, 2008:
“(3) The Registrar, on an application from a co-operative society on behalf of member or members enrolled up to the 2nd July, 2007 by such co-operative society in contravention of sub-rule (2) of rule 24 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 1973 (repealed vide notification NO. F 37 (Policy)/ RCS/142 dated 19th October, 2007), may regularize the membership of such member or members.
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rules (3), any regularization so made by the Registrar shall not affect the liability, criminal or civil, of any such member or any other person under any law, for the time being in force.
Rule 24(2) the Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 1973:
24. Conditions to be complied with for admission to membership:-
*******
2. In case of vacancy in a housing society including group housing society where layout and building plans have been approved by the competent authority, the same shall be filled by the committee by notifying It in leading daily newspaper of Delhi in Hindi and English. In case the number of applications are more than the notified vacancies the membership shall be finalised through draw of lot in the presence of authorised representative of the Registrar. (Added on 6.8.97;
14. A perusal of the above provisions would show that the Rule 90 Committee verification requirement was inserted by the Delhi Co-Operative Societies (Amendment) Act (8 of 2006) which came into effect on 13th January, 2007. Reading Section 77 of the DCS Act along with Rule 19(3) and Rule 24 of DCS Rules, it is clear that prior to the said insertion in Section 77 of the DCS Act, draw of lots could be conducted without the approval of the Rule 90 Committee. In other words, the draw of lots could be undertaken by the Registrar alone and approval of Rule 90 Committee was not required prior to 2007.
15. At this point, Ld. Counsel for RCS, Mr. Vashisht, to the contrary, submits that even prior to 2007, the practice was that the Rule 90 Committee would always send names of members to the Registrar after verification, who then approves the same.
16. Be that as it may, in the opinion of this Court, even if it is presumed that such a practice was adopted by the RCS that was thereafter included in the DCS Act later, the benefit of Rule 19(3) cannot be taken away from the members, who have become the members prior to 2007. The chronology of events in this case would show that flats have had completion certificates since 17th October, 2022. More than, two and half years have passed, and till date, the members are not able to occupy the flats. RCS officials have prayed for another six months to complete the process.
17. The record here would show that the RCS, by its letter dated 12th September, 2023 had approved 140 members and it was only for the allotment of the flats that the matter was kept before Rule 90 Committee. The said letter reads:
Sub:- Regarding clearance of memberships in respect of Ravi Shankar Co-op. Group Housing Society Limited (Regn. No.689/GH) Plot No.02, Sector-13, Dwarka, New Delhi-110078 for draw of lots
Sir,
Please find enclosed herewith copy of the agenda of 140 members in respect of Ravi Shankar Co-op. Group Housing Society Limited (Regn. no.689/GH) Plot No.02, Sector-13, Dwarka, New Delhi-110078 for clearance of their membership.
In this context, it is informed that the proposal of 140 Members have been approved by the Competent Authority i.e. RCS for clearance of their memberships and to be placed the same before the Committee constituted under Rule 90 of DCS Rules, 2007 for allotment of flats vide U.O. No.4527/RCS dated 05/09/2023 CD No. 107319688 (Copy of relevant noting sheet attached)
Hence, you are requested to place the Agenda item before Committee constituted under Rule 90 of DCS Rules, 2007 as and when scheduled.
18. Admittedly, the DDA is the authority, which has to allot the flats after the draw of lots is completed. In view of the fact that 147 members of the Society have all obtained membership prior to July, 2007, this Court is of the opinion that the benefit of Rule 19(3) ought to be extended to these members.
19. Accordingly, the RCS shall forward to the DDA the names of 140 approved members, as identified from the list of 148 members submitted today by Mr. Jain to Mr. Vashisht. Upon receipt, the DDA shall conduct a draw of lots and allot flats to the said members within six weeks.
20. The members who have not been approved by the Registrar yet are as follows:
S.No.
Membership No
Name of Member
6.
230
Sh. Satbir Singh Poonia
16.
443
Miss. Vishakha Chawla
35.
469
Sh. Kunal Agarwal
46.
488
Sh. Surender Kumar
47.
489
Smt. Anshu Mala Gautam
53.
502
Sh. Prashant Chadha
112.
569
Sh. Gaurav Sharma
148.
607
Sh. Jitendra Kumar Bansal
Insofar as they are concerned let the Rule 90 Committee look into their documents and send approval within a period of three months. If there are any objections, the same shall be communicated on an early date so that the requisite documents can be submitted by the said members.
21. In view of the above order, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the contempt petition, being CONT.CAS(C) 1314/2024, shall be withdrawn on the next date of hearing before the ld. Single Judge.
22. The present petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
JUDGE
APRIL 9, 2025/dk/Ar.
(corrected & released on 15th April, 2025)
1 [Substituted by Delhi Act 8 of 2006, section 7 for “by the Registrar” ]
—————
————————————————————
—————
————————————————————
W.P.(C) 4406/2025 Page 1 of 2