B N KHANNA Vs. REGISTRAR CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present writ petition, filed under Articles 226and 227 of the Constitution of India, Col. B.N. Khanna, petitioner herein,besides other reliefs, seeks to challenge the orders dated 16/04/1985, passedby the Lt. Governor of Delhi, respondent no. 4, in exercise of the jurisdictionunder Section 80 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 1972, (hereinafter calledthe Act) and another order dated 15/07/1982, passed by him, and prays forquashing of the same. For better appreciation, of the various contentions,raised by the parties, and the issues, involved in this case, it will be useful, torefer to in brief, the facts and circumstances of the case, which are as under :-

(2.) Diplomatic Enclave Extension Cooperative House Building Society,respondent no. 2 herein, hereinafter referred to as 'the society', was formed withthe objects to develop lands and allot the same to its members, so as to providethem the house building sites. Petitioner is a Founder Member of the Societyand his seniority is at No. 2, in the list of members. Petitioner raised theSociety, made it success and was its Secretary for four years, till December, 1960.In appreciation of the services, rendered by petitioner, the General Body andthe Managing Committee of the Society, resolved to allot him a selected plot ofhis choice, on 22/11/1959. According to petitioner, he and his familymembers, also contributed extensive lands, i.e. about 15000 sq. yds. to strengthenthe case of the Society, for acquisition of further land from Delhi Administration, for developing a residential colony.

(3.) Though, petitioner could demand five plots of 1200 sq. yards each,as per the policy, but, he asked for one plot of 1200 sq. yds. Because of personal vendetta of some office bearers, petitioner was allotted a plot, measuringonly 800 sq. yds. When, petitioner represented, against this allotment to thethen Chief Commissioner of Delhi, and respondent No. 1, he was illegallyremoved from the membership of the Society, on the ground, that petitioner hadrefused to pay for 1200 sq. yds. and that he could not give an affidavit, asrequired by Delhi Administration, since he had owned a flat/house in DefenceColony.