Lawful complaints and litigation by cooperative society members against office bearers do not constitute detrimental acts warranting expulsion; requires destructive conduct. Authorities must issue reasoned orders scrutinizing individual evidence.

JUDGMENT :

AMIT BORKAR, J.

1. The petitioners have instituted the present writ petition assailing the judgment and orders passed by the Revisional Authority, whereby the revisions preferred by the petitioners came to be dismissed and the action of respondent No.1 society in expelling the petitioners from its membership was confirmed. The expulsion has been upheld on the ground that the petitioners had allegedly indulged in acts prejudicial and detrimental to the normal and smooth functioning of the society.

2. The factual matrix giving rise to the present proceedings is as follows. Respondent No.1 is a co operative housing society registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The petitioners are members of the said society and owners of residential flats therein. Between the years 2017 and 2021, the petitioners had actively questioned the functioning of the office bearers of the society and had raised various grievances before statutory and administrative authorities, including the authorities under the Cooperative Department, the office of the Sub Registrar, appellate forums, and the Pune Municipal Corporation.

3. On 24 May 2021, respondent No.1 claims to have received a complaint purportedly signed by 26 members of the society seeking expulsion of the petitioners from membership. The allegation in the said complaint was that the petitioners were making false and defamatory complaints against the office bearers, thereby damaging the reputation of the society and creating obstacles in its day to day functioning. Thereafter, on 2 September 2023, the office bearers of respondent No.1 issued a show cause notice to the petitioners under Section 35 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, alleging that the conduct of the petitioners had adversely affected the reputation and working of the society. By the said notice, the petitioners were informed that a Special General Meeting would be convened on 22 October 2023 to consider a resolution for their removal from membership.

4. The petitioners, on 12 September 2023, submitted an interim reply to the show cause notice and called upon the society to furnish certain documents in support of the allegations. On 22 October 2023, a Special General Meeting of the society was convened. The petitioners were afforded an opportunity to present their explanation to the charges levelled against them. Upon consideration of the matter, a resolution for expulsion of the petitioners from the membership of the society was passed by a three fourth majority of the members present and voting.

5. On 4 December 2023, respondent No.1 submitted an application before the Deputy Registrar seeking approval of the resolution dated 22 October 2023, as required under the Act. The petitioners filed their reply to the said proceedings on 15 February 2024. By order dated 27 June 2024, the Deputy Registrar granted approval to the resolution and confirmed the removal of the petitioners from membership of the society.

6. Bei