1. Challenge to cooperative society elections because 18 non-members were permitted to vote and contest. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 20384
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Dinesh Bhatt, JJ
Rameshwar Singh Rathee – Appellant
Versus
Registrar Co-operative Societies – Respondent
W.P.(C) 14292/2026 | CM APPL. 66891/2026 | CM APPL. 66892/2026
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Karan Kumar Gogna
For the Respondents: Dhruv Rohatgi, Chandrika Sachdeva, Dhruv Kumar, Kunal Tandon, Aanchal Tandon, Niti Jain, Nitai Agarwal
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Karan Kumar Gogna
For the Respondents: Dhruv Rohatgi, Chandrika Sachdeva, Dhruv Kumar, Kunal Tandon, Aanchal Tandon, Niti Jain, Nitai Agarwal
Membership transfer in a cooperative society under Rule 29(g) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 2007, requires the transferee to be a first-degree blood relation; transfers via GPA or Agreement to Sell to non-blood relations are legally unsustainable.
Headnote:(A) Cooperative Societies - Membership Transfer - Validity of transfer to non-blood relations - Transfer of membership based on GPA, SPA, or Agreement to Sell to persons who are not first-degree blood relations is not legally sustainable under Rule 29(g) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 2007. (Para 17)
(B) Election Validity - Impact of invalid membership - Where persons whose membership is not duly approved or regularised are permitted to vote or contest, the resulting elections are untenable, necessitating the conduct of fresh elections. (Para 19)
Issues: Whether the elections to the Managing Committee of the Society were valid given the participation of 18 persons whose membership transfers were not regularised under the applicable rules.
Result: Petition disposed of as the RCS had already rejected the membership of the 18 persons, rendering the prayer for countermanding elections redundant.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
constitutional law
-
writ jurisdiction
- article 226 (Para 2)
-
writ jurisdiction
- practice and procedure
- administrative law
- property law
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner: non-members could not vote. Society: transferees were valid under rules. RCS: transfers not legally sustainable. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 )
3. RCS order held transfers of membership to 18 persons were not legally sustainable under relevant rules. (Para 18 , 19 )
4. Where membership transfers are invalid, fresh elections must be held for the managing committee. (Para 19 )
5. Petition disposed as prayer no longer survives. RCS may appoint Administrator; interim committee restrained from major financial decisions. (Para 20 , 22 , 23 )
6. Can persons who are not validly transferred members of a cooperative society vote or contest in its elections?
No. The RCS held such membership transfers are not legally sustainable, and the court directed fresh elections. (Para 18 , 19 )
7. What is the requirement for valid transfer of membership in a cooperative society under the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 2007?
The transferee must be a first-degree blood relation of the original member under Rule 29(g), unless Rule 92 is separately attracted. (Para 14 , 17 )
8. What happens when a representation regarding voters' list is pending but elections are scheduled?
The court directed elections to proceed as scheduled and the representation to be decided within three months thereafter. (Para 8 )
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging the elections to the Managing Committee of the Society i.e., Maharishi Dayanand CGHS Ltd. Masoodpur Village, Khasra no. 310 (Opposite Imperial Club of India), Opposite Imperial Club of India, New Delhi (hereinafter, ‘the Society’).
3. The background of the present case is that the Petitioner is one of the members of the society. According to the Petitioner, 18 persons, who were not members of the Society, have been allowed to participate in the elections, held on 09th August, 2026. The results of the election have also been declared.
4. The further case of the Petitioner is that the said 18 members were alleged transferees from the original members, whose membership had not been regularised and, according to the Petitioner, they could not have been permitted to vote or contest in the elections.
5. Previously, two writ petitions had been filed in respect of the elections of the same Society.
6. In the first writ petition being W.P.(C) 8553/2026 titled ‘Lt. Col. Rameshwar Singh Rathee and Anr. v. The Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Ors.’ the Court had, vide order dated 23rd July, 2026, directed that the elections of the Society be held in terms of the agenda dated 10th July, 2026 and an Observer for the conduct of the elections was also appointed. The relevant portion of the order dated 23rd July, 2026 is as under:
“[...] 7. Heard the ld. Counsel for the parties. In view of the fact that the Agenda notice has now been issued, the Court is not inclined to go into the issues of delay in conduct of elections. While there can be no doubt that such delays ought not to have occurred, and cautioning the Returning officer, let the elections be held in terms of the agenda shown to the Court, as issued by the Returning Officer. The said agenda dated 10th July, 2026 is extracted below: xxx xxx xxx
8. Mr. Kanwaljeet Arora, Principal District and Session Judge (Retd.) (M: 9910384733), is appointed as an observer for conduct of the elections of the Society.
9. A lumpsum fee of Rs.2,00,000/- shall be paid to the said Observer by the Society. The Returning Officer shall cooperate with the observer for conduct of the elections in a free, fair and peaceful manner….”
7. In W. P. (C) 9981/2026 titled ‘Meenal Singh & Ors. v. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies & ors.’, the challenge was raised in respect of the voters list for the conduct of the elections of the Society.
8. Vide order dated 23rd July, 2026 in W. P. (C) 9981/2026, the Court had directed as under:
“[...] 5. In view of the fact that elections have been announced and the Returning Officer has already been appointed, it is directed that the elections shall continue to be held, as scheduled. This Court has appointed an Observer for the elections vide today's order passed in W.P. (C) 8553/2026.
6. The Petitioners' representation dated 5th July, 2026 shall be decided within three months
7. The decision on this representation shall not hold back the elections in any manner….”
9. As can be seen from the above order, the Court had directed that the elections would continue as scheduled, as per the agenda. It was also noted that an observer had also been appointed by this Court for the conduct of the elections, vide order dated 23rd July, 2026 in W.P.(C) 8553/2026.
10. Further, it was also directed that Petitioner’s representation dated 5th July, 2026 be decided within three months.
11. In the meantime, the election results for the Managing Committee of the Society have been announced and the prayer in this petition, is for countermanding the said elections and to hold fresh elections.
12. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that, the 18 members having been permitted to contest and vote, and some having also succeeded, the elections are not tenable, as their membership
