Point in Issue :
Expulsion of member of housing society — When not justified?

Jayant Patel, J.—The short facts of the case appears to be that the petitioner was served with the notice for expulsion as the member by the Respondent No. 3 Society on the ground that he has approached to the Court by initiating litigation and therefore, there was wastage of money of the Society and hence, detrimental to the interest of the Society. The petitioner was called upon to explain as to why he should not be expelled as a member of the Society.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was not served with the notice and as a result thereof, he could not appear before the General Board whereas, as per the Society, the opportunity was given, but the same has not been availed of by the petitioner. On 31.05.2002, ultimately in the special general meeting of the Society, the Resolution was passed for expulsion of the petitioner as the member. It was sent to the District Registrar for approval. The District Registrar, ultimately, after hearing both the sides, granted approval vide order dated 25.07.2002. The petitioner carried the matter before the higher forum being Additional Registrar (Appeals) by preferring Appeal No.74/02. The said appeal also came to be dismissed on 31.12.2003. It is under these circumstances, the present petition before this Court.

3. Heard Mr. Shah for the petitioner, Mr. B.S. Patel for the private respondents and Ms. Patel, learned AGP for the State Authorities.

4. It is not in dispute that the ground on the basis of which the power exercised under Section 36 of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, (‘the Act’ for short) is that the petitioner in capacity as the member has approached to various Courts and the proceedings of litigation are initiated and therefore, the Society is made to incur the expenses for facing the litigation and the said ground is treated as detrimental to the interest of the Society by the general body of the Society and on the basis of which, the resolution has been passed by the Society.

5. Section 36 of the Act, which is relevant for the purpose of the present petition reads as under:

“Expulsion of members:

1. A society may, by resolution passed by three-fourths majority of all the members present and voting at a general meeting of members held for the purpose, expel a member for acts which are detrimental to the proper working of the society:

Provided that, no resolution shall be valid, unless the member concerned is given and opportunity of representing his case to the general body, and no resolution shall be effective unless it is submitted to the Registrar for his approval and approved by him:

Provided further that, the approval or disapproval of the Registrar shall be communicated to the society within a period of three months from the date of such submission, and in the absence of such communication the resolution shall be effective.

2. No member of a society who has been expelled under Sub-section (1) shall be eligible for readmission as a member of that society, or for admission as a member of any other society, for a period of two years from the date of such expulsion.

Provided that, the Registrar may, in special circumstances, sanction the readmission or admission, within, the said period, of any such member as a member of the said society or of any other society, as the case may be.”

6. It is an admitted position that the status of the petitioner was as a member in the Housing Cooperative Society. This Court had an occasion to consider the scope and ambit of the power of the general body of the Society under Section 36 of the Act in a housing co-operative society in case of Gordhanbhai N. Vaghela vs. Maruti Co-operative Housing Society & Ors. reported at 2003 (1) GLR 117. It was observed by the Court at Para 10 as under:

“10. In view of the earlier discussion, I am of the view that in the matter of exercising the power under Section 36 of the Act in a housing cooperative society, the principles of natural justice must be extended to a larger extent with