KALU RAM SHARMA Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner acquired membership of respondent NO. 2-Society on transfer from the original membership of his brother. The transfer was approved on 4. 4. 1976 and the petitioner claims to have been waiting for a plot since then as he was on the waitlist.

(2.) The petitioner claimed that it is in the year 2004, that he came to know that respondent NO. 3 had obtained an allotment of a plot fraudulently as he was disqualified on account of owning another property. The Society, however, did not heed to the representation of the petitioner and the petitioner made a complaint to the Office of the Registrar, Co-operative Societies (for short "RCS?)/respondent NO. 4. The Assistant RCS was appointed to verify the ownership of property NO. 1/11274, Subhash Park, Naveen Shahdara, Delhi on account of which the petitioner alleged that respondent NO. 3 was disentitled. The ownership of this property is stated to have been confirmed through the inquiry process. However, the RCS in terms of its order dated 2. 6. 2010 found that respondent NO. 3 fell within the exception clause provided under Clause 25 (1) (c) (i) of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the "DCS Rules?). The petitioner aggrieved by this decision filed a Revision Petition under Section 116 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 2003, which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 7. 7. 2011

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has, in the writ petition, reproduced the relevant portion of Rule 25 of the DCS Rules, which reads as under: