1 wp9697.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9697 OF 2010 Nalinee Lapsiwala & Anr. ...Petitioners Vs. The Deputy Registrar, H.West Ward, Mumbai and others ..Respondents. Petitioner No.2 in person present. Ms. M.P. Thakur, AGP for Respondent No.1. Mr. S.G. Talekar for Respondent No.2. Mr.A.D. More, Loop Officer, Grade I, H.West Ward present. CORAM : P.B. MAJMUDAR AND A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 30TH MARCH, 2011. P.C. 1. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed that the Administrator, who is appointed for the purpose of administration of the petitioners' society be directed not to take policy decision on the application filed by the members of the Co-operative Housing Society i.e. Vasant Kunj Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Administrator is appointed only for the purpose of holding election. The Administrator has taken policy decision by granting redevelopment permission. It is the submission on behalf of the petitioners that the Administrator cannot take any policy decision in this behalf. It is also further prayed that the election of the Society should be held immediately. 2 wp9697.10.sxw 2. Petitioner No.2 has argued the matter in person. The learned AGP Mrs. Thakur after taking instructions from the concerned officer, states that now the date of election is already fixed and the elections are going to be held on 16th April 2011. In view of the same, further direction can be given. The learned AGP further stated that majority of members passed the resolution in the Special General Body Meeting for redevelopment and the Administrator merely executed the decision and he has not taken any fresh decision in this behalf. 3. It may be true that on the basis of decision taken in Special General Body Meeting by the majority of members, decision in favour of redevelopment was taken, however, in our view, since election is going to be held in near future, the new elected members can examine the matter on their own afresh and especially when as on today no redevelopment work is carried out. We therefore, deem it proper to direct that till new body takes charge, redevelopment permission may not be implemented and it is for the new body to consider this aspect afresh. 4. It is clarified that we have not expressed our opinion as to whether redevelopment permission was required to be given , as this fact is left for the members of the Co-operative Housing Society and the newly elected body can consider this aspect as deemed fit. We are not inclined to accept prima facie, the submission of party-in person that the Administrator ought not to have granted such redevelopment permission, when the Special General Body in its meeting by majority decided in favour of redevelopment and it cannot be said that the Administrator has on his own taken any policy 3 wp9697.10.sxw decision. However, with a view that the newly elected body will take decision regarding redevelopment, we direct that till newly body takes charge the status quo as on today be maintained. It is for the new body to take fresh decision. Subject to what is stated above the petition is disposed of. ( A.A. SAYED, J. ) (P.B. MAJMUDAR, J.)