2016 Supreme(P&H) 1134
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rameshwar Singh Malik
CWP No.12292 of 2011 (O&M)
Alaknanda Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. & Anr.
v.
Financial Commissioner, Cooperation and Principal Secretary to Govt. Haryana
{Decided on 14/07/2016}
For the Petitioner:Mr. D.V. Sharma, Senior Advocate with Ms. Akshita Chauhan, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. S.S. Mann, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
For the Respondent No.3:Mr. Kanwal Goel, Advocate and Mr. Arun Monga, Advocate.
Headnote:(A) Haryana Co-operative Societies Act, 1984, S.114--Expulsion of member--Once the society has not expelled its member from its membership Registrar Cooperative Societies had no jurisdiction to entertain and decide appeal filed by member on basis of letters from which it may appear that member has been expelled.
(B) Haryana Co-operative Societies Act, 1984--Bye laws--Once the Society had adopted the model bye-laws, said bye-laws and procedure laid there under were to be scrupulously observed--Thus, the Society committed no wrong while insisting on the following of bye-laws--Society could not have been directed to violate clause of its bye laws. (Para 22)
(C) Haryana Co-operative Societies Act, 1984--Membership--Eligibility for membership was to be considered only after he would have furnished the requisite documents.
Mr. Rameshwar Singh Malik, J.: (Oral) - Instant writ petition is directed against the order dated 18.05.2011 (Annexure P-23) passed by the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Govt. of Haryana, Cooperation Department, whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner-Society was dismissed and the order dated 21.12.2006 (Annexure P-21) passed by Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana was upheld, holding respondent No.3 eligible to be a member of the petitioner- Society.
2. Briefly put, facts necessary for disposal of the present writ petition are that respondent No.3 submitted an application to the petitioner-Society in January, 2003 for his enrollment as member of the petitioner-Society. The Society vide letter dated 03.07.2003 (Annexure P-1) asked respondent No.3 to supply the requisite documents about his eligibility for becoming member of the petitioner-Society, but when respondent No.3 did not supply the requisite documents in response to communication dated 03.07.2003 (Annexure P-1), petitioner-Society wrote another letter dated 29.10.2003 (Annexure P-2). Respondent No.3 vide his letter dated 06.11.2003 (Annexure P-3) supplied the documents along with his affidavit. However, a combined reading of Annexures P-3 and affidavit of respondent No.3, would show that he did not establish his eligibility for membership of the petitioner-Society. It is pertinent to note here that vide communication dated 17.11.2003 (Annexure P-5), Manager of the petitioner-Society informed respondent No.3 that documents sent by him were in order but he did not refer to the eligibility of respondent No.3 for becoming member of the petitioner-Society, because of which this communication dated 17.11.2003 (Annexure P-5) would be of no consequence.
3. On close scrutiny of the documents supplied by respondent No.3, petitioner-Society found that respondent No.3 was not fulfilling the eligibility criteria for becoming member of the petitioner-Society. Vide communication dated 27.10.2004 (Annexure P-6), respondent No.3 was asked to show his eligibility for membership of the petitioner-Society. This letter dated 27.10.2004 (Annexure P-6) was replied by respondent No.3 vide his letter dated 31.10.2004 (Annexure P-7). Matter remained pending consideration before the petitioner- Society regarding the eligibility of respondent No.3 for becoming member of the petitioner-Society. Both the parties have been corresponding with each other, which is clear from different communications contained in Annexure P-8 to Annexure P-13.
4. Finally, case of respondent No.3 regarding his eligibility for membership of the petitioner-Society was considered by the Managing Committee of the petitioner-Society in its meeting held on 12.06.2005. Clarification from Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Gurgaon was also sought in this regard. Accordingly, respondent No.3 was informed vide letter dated 11.09.2005 (Annexure P-14) that despite repeated requests and reminders, he has not furnished the requisite documents, so as to establish his eligibility for becoming member of the petitioner-Society.
5. When no response was received from respondent No.3, he was again informed vide letter dated 06.10.2005 (Annexure P-15). However, instead of replying to the abovesaid communications dated 11.09.2005 and 06.10.2005 to the petitioner-Society, respondent No.3 filed his appeal before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana-respondent No.2 by way of Annexure P-16. Petitioner-Society filed its reply vide Annexure P-18 and respondent No.3 filed his rejoinder (Annexure P-19). Thereafter, petitioner-Society filed its rejoinder to the replication of respondent No.3 vide Annexure P-20. Case was heard by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana-respondent No.2 and he allowed the appeal of respondent No.3 vide impugned order dated 21.12.2006 (Annexure P- 21).
6. Petitioner-Society challenged the order dated 21.12.2006 passed by the Registrar, Cooperative Soci