Judgment:
V.B. Bansal, J.
(1) By this order we will dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 1129, 1130, 1131 and 1132 of 1987 since they arise out of the same order dated August 7,1986 of the Lieutenant Governor, Delhi setting aside the resolution dated March 25, 1984 approved by the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies on August 9, 1985 removing respondent No. 3 from the membership of the Rehabilitation Employees Cooperative House Building Society Limited (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'society') The prayer made by the petitioner is for the issue of a writ of certiorari for calling the record of the case and quashing the aforesaid order.
(2) The society was formed by the Employees of the Ministry of Rehabilitation, Government of India with a view to get land allotted from the Government of India so that the plots could be given to the members for the construction of houses. Krishan Lal Rathi, Ramesh Chander, Ram Niwas and Uma Shankar Saxena were enrolled as members of the Society on February 14, 1970 when they had deposited a sum of Rs. 100.00 each as share money. After the allotment of land to the Society by the Government of India a sum of Rs. lacs was deposited by the Society with the Government of India. Subsequently, letters were written to the members for the deposit of first Installment of Rs. 1600.00 towards the cost of plot. In this process letters were written to the members on February 24, 1971, June 17,1972 and July 27, 1972 but no payments were made by them.
(3) Another letter dated August 26, 1972 was sent by the Society to all the aforesaid respondents giving them a final chance to pay the first Installment of Rs. 1600.00 up to September 15, 1972 indicating that in case they fail to do so it would be presumed that they were not interested in the allotment of plots and their names would be removed from the register of members. Another letter was written on November 24, 1972 asking for the deposit of the amount by December 15, 1972 but no payment was still made to the Society. Final notice dated January 1, 1974 was sent the defaulter members to deposit the amount by January 15, 1974 failing which their names would be struck off from the register of members and the share money would be refunded. There was no response from these respondents and consequently cheques dated May 9, 1974 for Rs. 100.00 each were sent to the aforesaid four persons.
(4) K.L. Rathi returned the cheque with his covering letter dated June 2, 1975 as there was cutting in the cheque and so another cheque dated December 18, 1975 for Rs. 100.00 was sent to him. Respondents, however, did not withdraw the amount of these cheques.
(5) There were 36 members in all like the present four whose membership was terminated by the managing committee in similar circumstances. Eleven members out of the aforesaid 36 members applied for arbitration as a result of which their membership was upheld by the Arbitrators on a reference made by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies. The decision of the Arbitrator was upheld by the Delhi Cooperative Tribunal, Delhi vide order dated June 20,1984.
(6) The Society moved the Registrar, Cooperative Societies for approval of the decision of the managing committee for termination of the membership of 36 members of the Society which request was, however, turned down by the Registrar as conveyed vide letter under the signatures of Assistant Registrar (H).
(7) Notice dated September 9, 1983 was sent by the Society to the_ respondents of these four writs, inter alia, staling therein that they had committed persistent defaults in paying even first Installment towards the cost and that they had decided to approach the General Body of the Society for their expulsion.
(8) A letter dated February 20, 1984 was addressed to the respondents of the writ petitions that their cases for expulsion from the membership will be placed before the General Body Meeting on March 25, 1984 and were informed that they could present their cases before the General Body. These four respondents were expelled by the General Body on March 25, 1984. The respondents moved the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies who came to the conclusion that a dispute existed between the members and the Society to be referred to Arbitrator. A revision petition was filed by the Society against the said order of the Deputy Registrar and a separate application was moved to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies for approval of the resolution for expulsion of the members. The revision petition of the petitioner was accepted by the Lieutenant Governor, Delhi vide order dated February 25, 1985.
(9) The resolution of the General Body was approved by the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies exercising the powers of the Registrar vide order dated August 9, 1985.
(10) Krishna Lal Rathi, Ramesh Chand Gupta, Ram Niwas and Uma Shankar Saxena preferred appeals under Section 76 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act before the Lieutenant Governor who accepted their appeals and set aside the resolution dated March 25, 1984 of the General Body approved by the Deputy Registrar vide letter dated August 9, 1985 and gave directions that the Society may take the payment due from the appellants along with simple interest.
(11) It is the admitted case of the parties that there were 36 members in all who made defaults in making payments towards the first Installment for the purchase of land by the Society and their names were removed from the register of members of the managing committee and cheques for Rs. 100.00 each were sent to them which they had deposited towards share money. There is no dispute about the factum of 11 members having taken arbitration proceedings which ultimately went in their favor and they have since been allowed to deposit the amount towards the cost of plot and, thus continue to be regular members.
(12) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents Krishan Lal Rathi, Ramesh Chander, Ram Niwas and Uma Shankar Saxena having not opted for arbitration proceedings cannot get any benefit from the fact that 11 members similarly situated have been admitted by the Society to be the members. He has further contended that there have been persistent defaults in the payment of amount by the respondent-members and so they have been rightly expelled by the General Body of the Society, duly approved by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies. He has, thus, submitted that there was no material on record before the Lieutenant Governor who has committed a mistake in accepting the appeal by the respondent-members. He has also admitted that the Lieutenant Governor had relied upon wholly irrelevant and non-existent facts ignoring the material on record and, thus prayed that the impugned order be quashed.
(13) We have given our thoughtful consideration to these submissions in the light of the records but have not been able to persuade ourselves to agree to these submissions.
(14) Rule 36 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 1973 provides the procedure for expulsion of members. It is only the General Body which can pass a resolution for the expulsion of a member and it would be effective only when approved by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies. Clause 7 of Bye-laws of the Rehabilitation Ministry Employees Cooperative House Building Society provides that a member of the Society may be expelled by a 2/3rd majority of votes of the members present if he makes a default in the payment of cost of land or development of land. The managing committee had earlier removed the names of the respondent-members from the register of members which was, however, not approved by the Registrar and so that removal of their names could not be of any assistance or help to the petitioner. The case of the petitioner has been that there was a default in the payment of the first Installment by the respondent members inspire of repeated demands and so there was no option for the Society except to expelled them.
(15) Learned counsel for the respondents has, however, referred to the letter dated August 28, 1981 (Annexure R2) annexed to the counter-affidavit filed by K.L. Rathi, This is a letter by the Society addressed to Krishan Lal Rathi stating therein that 'the question of admission as a member of the Society of persons belonging to your category whose cheques were returned, is consideration/examination with the Deputy Registrar (A), Office of the under Registrar, Delhi Cooperative Societies,' and that 'the question of asking money from you as well as from others of your category will arise only after the decision communicated by the Deputy Registrar (A)'. In this way cheque dated March 27, 1981 for Rs. 5,600.00 sent by Krishan Lal Rathi to the Society was returned. In these circumstances, the Society can make no grievance of the default by the respondents in making payment of the money to it.
(16) It is not disputed that under Section 76(e) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 1972, decision of the General Body of the Society expelling the respondent-members could be challenged by them by way of appeal to the Lieutenant Governor who has vide the impugned order accepted their appeal. The extraordinary writ jurisdiction can be exercised by this Court only to correct legal or jurisdictional infirmities in the action of the Appellate Authority. It is not for us to decide questions of fact while exercising our discretion under writ juridiction. The view taken by the Lieutenant Governor, Delhi cannot be said to be in contravention of any law or rules. As already referred to above, the Society has given the benefit to 11 members who had gone for arbitration proceedings and the respondent-members are also of the same category. They can, thereforee, not be discriminated against regarding their membership. We find no infirmity in the impugned order and dismiss the writ petitions accordingly with costs. Respondent No. 3 is entitled to get costs of Rs. 2500.00.