SHAKTI COOPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, COURTS BUILDING, SANSAD MARG AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Another report has been received from the Administrator. Certain directions of this court have also been complied with.

(2.) In this case, the present LPA was instituted against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 12th Oct., 1982 which had been passed as an interim order during the pendency of the writ petition. This order had directed that an authentic list of members should be prepared and the plots should be distributed to end all the controversy between the members. Actually, the writ petition was filed challenging the order of the Registrar, who had directed the Secretary not to call the meeting of the general body for election, as there was no valid list of members. The secretary and one other had filed the writ petition. One of the points raised was that there was collusion between the Registrar and another group in the Society. At the hearing before the single Judge, an authentic list of members was sought to be prepared, the learned counsel present were directed to furnish their own list. Thereafter, the petitioners moved an application stating that they did not want to pursue the writ petition because the election was already held on 3rd Jan., 1982. This was the C.M. which led to the order. The learned single Judge held that the writ petition could not be withdrawn and that there was an agreed solution about the manner in which the writ petition was to be decided. In any event, the learned single Judge held :

(3.) The L.P.A. was directed therefore against the order of the learned single Judge refusing to allow the writ petition to be withdrawn. The matter came up after the show-cause notice before the Court on several occasions commencing from Nov., 1982. Different Benches have passed different orders during the pendency of this appeal. Eventually, an order was passed on 16th Feb., 1983 suggesting that an administrator should be appointed by the court to take charge of the affairs of the society. This administrator was directed to finalise the membership list and run the affairs of the society including holding of an election. After the elections were held he was to hand over the charge to the newly elected managing committee. All the counsel appearing before the court were ready for this solution. Then, Mr. P.N. Khanna, a retired judge of this Court was appointed administrator and directions were given that all the documents should be given to him and the 8 parties should fully cooperate with him on this matter. Since 1983 the administrator has been looking after the affairs of this society. Several interim reports have been submitted by him to this Court and, as mentioned earlier, different orders have been passed on the basis of those reports In fact, as long as 16th Jan. 1984 a final report was submitted by him but after objections were filed to these reports, the I matter dragged on and on.