High Court · 2025

Petitioner :- Border Security Force Co-Operative Housing Society Thru. Secy. Smt. Minna Mehar Franklin Respondent :- U.P. Housing And Development Board Thru. Housing Commissioner And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammed Mustafa Khan,Shireesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, learned Counsel for the opposite parties and perused the record.

2. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers :- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 22.07.2025, contained in Annexure Nos.1 and 2 respectively to this writ petition ; (ii). issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 29.07.2025, contained in Annexure No.3 to this writ petition ; (iii). issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no.2 to continue the Committee of Management to perform their functions and not to unnecessary interfere in the functioning of the Committee of Management of the Society."

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a Co-operative Housing Society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act at District Gautam Budh Nagar and functions according to its Bye-laws. The election of Committee of Management of the Society was conducted on 09.11.2021 for the period of five years. Certain complaints were made by few members of the Society, who were defaulters and the opposite party no.2 taking into account the complaint, issued a letter to the Co-operative OfÏcer, (Housing), Uttar Pradesh Awas Evam Vikas Parishad to submit the factual report. Thereafter, on the basis of such report, the opposite party no.2 issued four Orders on 15.01.2025 calling upon the petitioner to ensure removal of four members of the Committee of Management including the President, Chairman, Vice President and Secretary.

4. The Committee of Management it its meeting dated 31.01.2025 considered the defence pleaded by the concerned OfÏce Bearers and took a conscious decision not to remove such four OfÏce Bearers from their respective positions in the Committee of Management. A meeting of the Committee of Management of the Society was again convened on 09.03.2025 which ratified the decision taken on 31.01.2025 and it was decided not to remove any of the OfÏce Bearers of the Committee of Management. Such information regarding the decision taken was given to the opposite party no.2. The opposite party no.2 again issued notice under Section 38 (2) of the Act on 12.06.2025 and 04.07.2025 calling upon such OfÏce Bearers to appear before him. On 29.06.2025, a General Body meeting of the Society was held and a decision was taken that the Committee of Management's decisions taken in its meetings dated 31.01.2025 and 15.03.2025 were in accordance with law and they were afÏrmed.

5. Petitioner submitted objections on 25.06.2025 against notice dated 12.06.2025 saying that the Committee of Management of the Society had already taken a decision in compliance of the notice dated 15.1.2025 and such decision was also communicated to the opposite party no. 2. The petitioner again submitted objections before the opposite party no.2 in pursuance of the notice dated 04.07.2025 saying that opposite party no.2 lacks jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings under Section 38 (2) of the Act as the Society had already taken a decision on the notice issued under Section 38(1) of the Act. However, despite such communication, the opposite party no.2 has issued the impugned orders removing the OfÏce Bearers of the Committee of Management in purported exercise of power under Section 38(2) of the Act.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out the reply given by the Committee to the earlier notices issued by the opposite party no.2, such reply and minutes of the meeting having been filed as annexures to the writ petition. It has been stated that in the impugned orders, no detailed consideration has taken place of the Committee's decision and the impugned orders have been passed in great haste without considering such reply/objections of the Committee and its OfÏce Bearers.

7. Shri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that Committee of Management has filed the writ petition on its own whereas the four OfÏce Bearers who have been removed have not come before this court. He further says that there is a provision of appeal under the Act against such orders passed under Section 38(2) by the opposite party no.2 before the Co-operative Tribunal. Learned counsel for respondents has also pointed out that an interim Committee of Management has also been formed by the opposite party no.2 on 08.08.2025.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon judgment rendered in Writ C No.24279 of 2024 (Committee of Management, Grih Laxmi Sahkari Awas Samit Ltd., and two others vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) decided on 22.08.2024 Neutral Citation No. 2024 : AHC : 134604-DB, wherein the Division Bench of this Court has held that the statutory remedy as given under the Act before the Tribunal would not come in the way of entertaining the writ petition where the order passed by the Registrar is without jurisdiction. It has also been submitted that four OfÏce Bearers of the Committee of Management have been removed by the impugned orders and the Society is being aggrieved as it had ratified the decision taken by the Committee of Management and its OfÏce Bearers through a General Body Meeting has come before this Court through its Secretary. It has also been stated that Interim Committee has been formed on 8th August, 2025 while the Writ Petition was filed on 1st of August, 2025.

9. We have gone through the orders impugned in the writ petition i.e. the orders dated 22.07.2025 which only mention that despite notice issued on 12.06.2025, fixing date on 27.06.2025 and notice issued on 04.07.2025 fixing date on 15.07.2025 for hearing, the OfÏce Bearers proposed to be removed by the opposite party no. 2 have not submitted their reply. It does not consider reply of the Committee of Management regarding decision taken in its two meetings which was ratified by the General Body of the Society also. Both the Order No.3565 and Order No.3564 dated 22.07.2025, no mention has been made of the Committee taking a decision which was ratified by its General Body.

10. We therefore, set aside Order No.3564 and Order No.3565 dated 22.07.2025 and remand the matter back to the opposite party no.2 to consider the decision taken by the Committee of Management as ratified by its General Body/objections already filed by the Committee, and then take a reasoned and appropriate decision in the matter within a further period of four weeks.

11. The Petitioner's Society is given liberty to make a fresh representation to the opposite party no. 2 within a week from today along with the certified copy of this order.

12. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 14.8.2025 Pks POOJA SETH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench