KRISHAN KUMAR SACHAN Vs. L T GOVERNOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short question relating to interpretation of Rule 25 (l) (c) (i) of the delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the rules) arises for decision in this petition. The said Rule, to the extent it is relevant for the purposes of this case, is reproduced below:-

(2.) THE facts necessary for deciding the present petition are as under: -Petitioner became the member of respondent No. 6 Society in the year 1982. As per the petitioner, he continued to pay his share. He has, in all, paid Rs. 1,20,000/- towards the share of construction to the Society. On 20. 04. 1989, petitioner received a show-cause notice from the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, i. e. , respondent No. 3 wherein it was stated that it had been brought to the notice of the Department that the wife of the petitioner had property No. 8649, Shastri Nagar, Delhi in her name and as such petitioner had incurred the disqualification under Rule 25 (l) (c) (i) of the said Rules. A reply was submitted by the petitioner wherein he stated that the area of the said house was 70 sq. yds. and was situated in a slum area and he was only a care taker as the Power of Attorney was in the name of his wife and, as such, he had not incurred disqualification as is alleged.

(3.) THE Registrar heard the petitioner as well as the Society and thereafter passed order dated 07. 11. 1991 holding that the case of the petitioner was weak as his wife purchased house No. 8649, Shastri Nagar, delhi in 1982 and the petitioner became member of the Society in 1983. It was also held that even a Power of Attorney holder attracts the disqualification under Rule 25 (1) (c) (i) of the aforesaid Rules and further held that even if the house was in unauthorized colony, the same was not exempted from the application of Rule 25 (1) (i) (c ). The Registrar therefore terminated the membership of the petitioner from the aforesaid Society and ordered refund of his share money.