Amarjit Kaur vs The Registrar on 28 November, 2008

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH.

                                                 C.W.P. No. 12381 of 2007
                                       DATE OF DECISION : 28.11.2008

Amarjit Kaur
                                                         .... PETITIONER

                                  Versus

The Registrar, Coop. Societies, U.T. Chandigarh and others
                                                      ..... RESPONDENTS

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH


Present:    Mr. J.S. Virk, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.

            None for respondents No.1,2 and 4.

            Mr. N.S. Minhas, Advocate,
            for respondent No.3.

                        ***

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )

The petitioner, who has been substituted as a member of

respondent No.3 Society vide resolution dated 23.2.2002, passed by the

respondent Society on the basis of the order dated 5.2.2002, passed by the

Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, U.T., Chandigarh, has filed this

petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuing

direction to the respondent Society to include the petitioner as its member

and give all the benefits to her, which were to be given to her deceased

husband, who was initially member of the respondent Society.

Undisputedly, as per the decision of the respondent Society, a
CWP No. 12381 of 2007 -2-

flat was to be allotted to only those persons, who had paid initial earnest

tentative money by 31.1.1992. Admittedly, the husband of the petitioner,

who died on 26.12.1993, did not make the said payment. Thus, he was

considered ineligible for allotment of the flat.

In view of the aforesaid facts, learned counsel for the petitioner

confines the prayer that though the petitioner is not entitled for the flat, but

she may be treated as member of the respondent Society and in future, if any

scheme is floated by the respondent Society or any flat becomes available

for allotment, the claim of the petitioner against those flats may be

considered in accordance with law.

Learned counsel for respondent Society does not dispute the

aforesaid factual position and states that as far as the allotment of flat in

future is concerned, the petitioner will be treated as member of the society

and accordingly, if any flat is available or any new scheme is floated by the

respondent Society, the name of the petitioner will be considered for the

allotment of flat, if she is eligible for the said allotment.

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid

terms.

                                           ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
                                                   JUDGE


November 28, 2008                             ( JASWANT SINGH )
ndj                                                 JUDGE