( 1 ) THE petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1, The Registrar, Delhi Coop. Group Housing Societies to clear his name for allotment of flat and for directing the Rishi Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd. , Respondent No. 2 to allot the flat to the petitioner.

( 2 ) AN interesting question arising in this writ petition is: "whether a KARTA of HUF, who has purchased a house is disqualified for the purpose of the membership of a housing society and allotment of plot of land in the Society under Rule 25 (i) (c) of Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules 1973"?

( 3 ) BEFORE proceeding further, let us see the background in which this question arose. The petitioner became member of the respondent No. 2 Society in 1979. On 28. 11. 1988 a complaint was received by the respondent society that the petitioner had become disqualified for he had purchased a House No. W 76, Greater Kailash, Part-1, New Delhi. On 4. 3. 1989, the respondent society required the petitioner to submit a fresh affidavit in the prescribed form. On 10. 5. 1989, the petitioner requested the society to return back the money along with the interest/equalization Charges. In the meeting of 26. 7. 1989 and 12. 11. 1989. the petitioner was expelled from the membership. On 27. 4. 1990 the society again demanded Rs. 70,406. 00 to clear his name. On demand of Rs. 79,971. 10 towards the cost of the flat, the petitioner made the payment of Rs. 80,000. 00 on 6. 8. 1990. On 25. 1. 92 and 2. 3. 92, the petitioner was again required to approach the Registrar, Delhi Coop. Group Housing Societies, for including his name in the draw of lots. Despite the request made, his name was not cleared. The society demanded Rs. 81,756 further. That amount was also paid on 4. 3. 1994. Despite the letter dated 30. 3. 94, the respondent No. 1 failed to clear his name for allotment of flat and respondent No. 2 failed to give any flat to the petitioner.

( 4 ) ACCORDING to affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent No. 1, his case is that on the basis of the complaint received, clarifications were sought from the petitioner about the allegation that he was having residential property in Delhi. In his reply, the petitioner had admitted that he had purchased a residential property bearing No. W-76. Grealer Kailash, New Delhi in the name of HUF and the petitioner is the KARTA thereof. It was also revealed from the sale deed that the property was purchased prior to the admission of the petitioner as member of the society. In view of Rule 25 of the Delhi Cooperative Society Rules,1973, the petitioner incurred disqualification to become a member of the society. Accordingly, the petitioner had not been found eligible for membership of the society. Obviously, he was not entitled to the flat, was the plea of the Respondent No. 1,the Registrar,delhi Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd.

( 5 ) THE Respondent No. 2 had belatedly taken a plea that the petitioner is a valid member of the society and his name was sent to the Registrar, Coop. Group Housing Societies as his name has not been cleared (though earlier on 26. 7. 1989 and 12. 11. 1989, he was admittedly expelled by the Society ). The dispute whether the petitioner had become disqualified under Rule 25, was the matter to be decided by the Registrar under Rule 25 (iv) of Delhi Co operative Societies Rules, 1973. "

( 6 ) IN his rejoinder affidavit dated 20. 7. 1995, the petitioner denied that he owned any house/property in his individual capacity. The property bearing No. W-76 Greater Kailash, Part-1, New Delhi was an HUF property of which the petitioner is a KARTA.

( 7 ) WE have heard the learned counsel for the - petitioner , Shri Ravi Gupta, Shri Sanjay Poddar, Advocate for Respondent No. 1 and Sh. Anil Kumar, Advocate, counsel for Rishi Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd. (Respondent No. 2) and gone through the records.

( 8 ) IT was pleaded by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Delhi Co operative Societies Act and the rule