IFUNA CO-OPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETIES LTD. vs THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPEARIVE SOCIETIES, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
$~22
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 15913/2023
IFUNA CO-OPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING
SOCIETIES LTD. ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vikas Goyal with Mr. Ankit Yadav, Advocates
versus
THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Satyakam, ASC for GNCTD
% Date of Decision: 23rd February, 2024
CORAM:
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, ACJ: (ORAL)
CM APPL. 11228/2024 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Accordingly, this application is disposed of.
REVIEW PETITION NO. 70/2024
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 Petitioners 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.2s 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.2s 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 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 ex-facie untenable as no such condition of domicile is prescribed under Section 8 of the Act of 1972 which reads as under:
8. Power of the Registrar to decide certain questions.- Where any question arises whether for the purpose of this Act a person resides in the area of operation of a society or not, or whether a society is of same type as another society or of different type, the question shall be decided by the Registrar whose decision shall be final.
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:
24. Conditions to be complied with for admission to membership. No person shall be admitted as a member of a cooperative society unless
(i) he has applied in writing in the form laid down by the cooperative society or in the form specified by the Registrar, if any, for membership along with a declaration on oath that he is not a member of any other cooperative society having similar objects;
(ii) his application is approved by the committee of the cooperative society in pursuance of the powers conferred on it in that behalf and subject to such resolution as the general body may in pursuance of the powers conferred on it in that behalf from time to time pass, and in the case of nominal, associate, by an officer of the society authorised in that behalf by the committee;
(iii) he has fulfilled all other conditions laid down in the Act, the rules and the bye-laws;
(iv) in case of a firm, company or body corporate, society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, a public trust registered under any law for the time being in force relating to registration of public trust or a local authority, the application for membership is accompanied by a resolution authorising it to apply for such membership and the sanction of the Lt. Governor has been accorded.
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
1 2022 SCC OnLine Del 1360
2 Paragraphs 12, 14 and 15
—————
————————————————————
—————
————————————————————
W.P.(C) 15913/2023 Page 2 of 2