Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 17865
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Vikas Mahajan, JJ
Ashok Dixit – Appellant
Versus
Registrar Cooperative Societies – Respondent
W.P.(C) 12353/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Rajiv Vig
For the Respondents: Shashi Pratap Singh, Anamika Tyagi, Laqshyaa Saluja
The Court directed the Registrar of Cooperative Societies to appoint a new Administrator-cum-Returning Officer to conduct fresh elections for a cooperative society after the previous officer resigned, ensuring the process is completed by a fixed date and funds are used strictly for essential expenses.
Headnote:(A) Cooperative Societies - Election Process - Appointment of Returning Officer - Where previous elections of a Managing Committee are set aside due to irregularities and the subsequently appointed Returning Officer resigns, the Registrar is directed to appoint a new Administrator-cum-Returning Officer to ensure the conduct of fresh elections within a stipulated timeframe. (Para 13, 14)
(B) Financial Management - Use of Society Funds - During the administration of a society for the purpose of conducting elections, the Administrator-cum-Returning Officer is restricted to utilizing funds only for day-to-day expenses and election-related costs to prevent unauthorized expenditure. (Para 15)
Issues: Whether the RCS should be directed to appoint a new Administrator-cum-Returning Officer for the conduct of fresh elections of the Managing Committee of the Society.
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The presentpetitionrelatesto the Patel CGHSLtd.,Plot No.10,Sector- 13, Rohini, Delhi-110085 (hereinafter, ‘the Society’).
3. The Petitioners herein are members of the Society, who have sought directionsagainsttheRegistrarofCo-operativeSocieties (hereinafter,‘RCS’) for forthwith appointment of an Administrator-cum-Returning Officer under Section 35(5) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 , to enable the conduct of the fresh elections of the Managing Committee of the Society.
4. In an earlier writ petition, namely, Writ Petition (Civil) 8790/2026 titled ‘The Patel CGHS Ltd. & Ors. v. Registrar Cooperative Societies & Ors.’, the Society had assailed the order of the Delhi Co-operative Tribunal, dated 12th May 2026 in Appeal No. 025/2026/DCT
5. Vide the aforesaid order, the award dated 12th January, 2026, passed by the sole Arbitrator, was considered.
6. In terms of the said award dated 12th January, 2026, the ld. Arbitrator had set aside the earlier election of the Managing Committee of the Society.
7. The DCT vide order dated 12th May,2026,had upheld the award dated 12th January, 2026 and had also found that there were violations in the conduct of elections.
8. Accordingly, while considering the same, this Court in Writ Petition (Civil) 8790/20, vide order dated 6th July, 2026 had observed that the said factual findings of the DCT would not be required to be interfered with. However, further directions were issued as under:
[...] 12.The Court has heard Mr. Garg, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Rajiv Vig, ld. Counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The Court has also perused the photographs which have been placed on record.
13. The photographs do show, that in some of the images, the candidates are present, at the time, when the members are voting.
14. In certain cases, members, particularly senior citizens, were assisted by their family members, while casting their votes. In some other instances, the domestic staff of the members were found to have participated in the voting process. Such acts would constitute clear irregularities in the conduct of the election.
15. Further, ld. Arbitrator has also recorded that the complete videography of the election process was not placed on record. These are essentially factual issues, which have been examined in detail by both the ld. Arbitrator and the DCT. In the exercise of writ jurisdiction, this Court would not ordinarily interfere with such concurrent factual findings, unless the same are shown to be perverse, arbitrary, or suffering from manifest illegality.
16. A new Returning Officer i.e., Mr. Rajesh Sakkarwal, ADHOC-DANICS (Retd.), has already been appointed by the RCS.
17. Moreover, the present Managing Committee which has challenged the impugned order, has also been holding office since 2024 and morethantwoyearsoutofthethreeyearstermhas already lapsed.
18. Under these circumstances, let the fresh elections be held by the Returning Officer, in accordance with the DCS Act and Rules. The Petitioners shall cooperate in the conduct of elections in a free and fair manner.
19. No further directions are required to be passed in the present matter.
20. The present petition is disposed of in these terms. All pending applications are also disposed of.”
9. As can be seen from the above order, the Court had noted that a new Returning Officer namely, Shri. Rajesh Sakkarwal, ADHOC-DANICS (Retd.)hadalreadybeenappointedbytheRCS,andaccordinglythedirections were issued for conduct of the fresh elections for the Managing Committee of the Society.
10. The grievance now appears to be that the Returning Officer is not taking any steps for conduct of the elections. Mr. Rajiv Vig, ld. Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Returning Officer had been appointed in June, however, till date, no steps have been taken for the conduct of the elections for the Managing Com
