1. Called out from the final hearing board. Heard finally, by consent of the parties.

2. The Petitioner-Society has challenged orders dated 15 December 2009 passed by Respondent No.1-the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai whereby, their Revision Application under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, “the MCS Act”) was dismissed and thereby, order dated 13 April 2009 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, H-West Ward, Mumbai under Section 23(2) of the MCS Act, is confirmed.

3. The Petitioner-Society is a Tenant Co-operative Society, as contemplated under Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 (for short, “the MCS Rules”). Respondent No.5 applied for the transfer of suit shares and suit flat from the name of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4-the members of the Petitioner Society on 24 January 2004. Respondent No.3 was the Director of Respondent No.5 and also the Secretary of Petitioner Society. The Society declined to the said transfer for want of sufficient stamp and registration. The Society never accepted the payment on behalf of Respondent No.5, and even through Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, and communicated their inability to transfer the suit flat. The Application filed by Respondent No.5, therefore, rejected and the flat remained, so also the membership, in the name of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. The Society returned the amount also. Respondent Nos. 6 and 7, on 15 August 2008, filed an Application for transfer of suit flat and suit shares from Respondent No.5 to them. On 26 August 2008, the same was rejected as Respondent No.5 was not the owner of the suit flat in the above back ground. Respondent Nos. 6 and 7, therefore, invoked Section 23(1) of MCS Act, 1960 before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies on 13 April 2009. The same was allowed and directed the Petitioner to admit them as members in respect of the suit shares and the suit flat. The Petitioner Society therefore, preferred the Revision Application and challenged the above order. Respondent No.1-the Divisional Joint Registrar by impugned order dated 15 December 2009, rejected the Revision Application, therefore, the present Writ Petition by the Society.

4. The MCS Act and Rules made thereunder provides the provisions for members and membership and various classes of the same and the procedure to be followed for getting such membership. Mere filing of Application for getting membership, is not sufficient. The Society is governed and run by the bye-laws, which is basic requirement to consider to grant and/or refuse such membership. Ultimately, the Registrar, after giving an opportunity to all the parties even decided the deemed membership and/or otherwise. Normally, the Society, needs to grant the membership if all other requisite elements and/or qualifications are available. Even for rejection, the Society must give sufficient reason and/or must show the grounds for such refusal of admission. In the present case, for the above stated case, the Society refused to accept the membership Application. Those admitted positions on record, in my view, ought not to have been overlooked by the Authorities.

5. It is relevant to note that, in view of above background, the basic scheme and procedure so prescribed under the MCS Act referring to “Member”/“Membership”. Section 2(19)(a) provides the concept of “member”. The concept “deemed member” as provided in Sections 22(2) and 23 is not defined. Section 22(2) deals with the members who became members and Section 23 provides a procedure for open membership. For deciding the membership issue, the aspect of restriction on transfer or charge of share or interest, as contemplated under Section 29 is also relevant, so also to maintain the register of members as contemplated under Section 38 of the MCS Act. Rule 38 of the bye-laws definitely covers that the Society needs to follow the bye-laws, which binds the Society, as well a