,* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION ( C ) rro+s OF soog & C.M. NO. rogsz OF zooe Roshan Lal Jain . . ..Petitioner Versus Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Ors. ....Respondents 'Mr. Hem Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate for R-MCD Ms. Jyoti Singh, Advocate with Mr. Ankur Chibbar, t\dv. for petitioners. Ms. Sana Ansari and Mr. Sumeet Batra, Advocates for Ms. Zubeda Begum, Advocate for R-RCS. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for Administrator. Ms. Savita Prabhar, Advocate for Mr. K.L. Arora, B.B. Arora and Ms. Seema Arora (Respondents) and Mr. Roshan LaI Jain (Petitioner). Mr. Rajesh (UDC) with record. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOIIAN SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the JudgmentP 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest? A.K. SrKRr. J.(ORAL) For orders, see W.P. (C) No.z338-53/2oo5. MxmKff#"P/ JUDGE ,{ (_ il -u WP (C) No.Zess-53l20o5WP(C) No.l lo4,e/zooe & CM No.loe27l2oo Page r ofr Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified IN THtr X{IGI{ COUI{T OF'DEI-X{I AT I\TEW DEI,I{X REVIEW PtrTITION NO. I,+764OF zoos , REVIEW PETITION NO.Tg OF.2oog REVIEW PETITION NO. Tr OF 2oo9. C.M. N.O. roso+ OF zoos . C.M. NO. dbl OF zoog c.M. NO. 558 OF 200e C.M. NO. de8 OF zoog ' C.M. NO.'d99 OF zoog C.M. NO. ooo OF 2oo9 C.M. NO. zzzo OF zoog - C.M. NO. ,lr+r OF zoog C.M. NO. rzss+ OF zooe 'irt I WRXT PETX'ItrON (C) NO. essg-ds OF sood q (r) Ii.EVXE\M FET'ITION NO. r+zo+ OF goos Mrs. Neeiarn & Ors. Versus The Financial Commissioner & Ors. (e) R.EI/ltEW t ETtrT'ION NO.ld OF eooe Smt. G. Alavadi VersLls '' -llre Financial Commissioner & Ors. (s) R.EVIEW FETXTION NO. rz OF eoog Bishan Su'aroop Vats & Ors. Versns The Financial Commissioner & Ors. (*) C.M. NO. roso+ OF soos RP Nos. 1r,26 + / zooe, t 5-, tt /,zoog &'CM Nos. r o so+ / coos, 557, 558,598, 599, 600,2770,4r4t, t2584,, 95e5/2oog in wP (c) No.253S-53l2005wP(c)No.r tO+g/coog & CM No.l0s.2t /"zoo . . . .Petitioners /applj cants . . ..Responclents. . . ..Petitioner . . ..Responclents. . . ..Petitiorrer . ..Responcients. Page r ofto Neelam & Ors. . Versus The Financial Commissioher & Ors. (5) C.M. NO. 552 OF qooa . . ..Petitioner . . ..Respondents. . . ..Petitioner . . ..Petitioners ' I . . ..Itesponctents. . . ..Petitioners Page z ofre . . ..Petitioners d I 17\ V . . ..Responclents. Smt. Neelam .\ \ rr ersLls RP Nos.r+zo+/eool, t5, tt/coog & CM Nos.16 soq/9,ooe, 557, 555,598, 599, 600,2770, +r4r, 12584, t2,5e5/COOS in WP (C) No.zs3s-5s /aoo'WP(C) No. I loae /Toos & CM No.10e2?/200 . The Financial Commissioner & Ors. (rr) C.M. NO. +r+L OF sooe Smt. G. Alavacli & Ors. Versus The Financial Commissioner & Ors. ns\ C.M. NO. re6s4,OF eoas . . ..retrtroner Neelam versus The Financial Commissioner & Ors. ..Respondents. . (1e) C.M. NO. rersr OF soog Neelam . . ..Petitioner .l^ Versus The Financial Commissioner & ors. . . ..Responclents. Mfm.XT PETtr'lftrON (C) NO. 4egs-de OlF spol AND (r+) WI{IT'FETtrTION ( C ) rro+g OF eoog & C.M. NO. rogez OF' 2009. Roshan Lai Jain . ..Petitioner Versus Registrar of Cooperative Sbcieties & Ors. . . ..Respondents. tY ffi,ff#;1"31il#"ocate for Mr sanieev sabharrval, Ms. Jyoti Singh, Advocate with Mr. Ankur Chibbar-, Adv.. for petitioners. M:. irn"*H:;rff i"*i:il:1iu1' Acr'ocates ror Mr. Sancleep Itumar, Advocate for Aclministruao.. ' Ms. Neelam Jain rvith Mr. AND. Rao, Aclvocate fbr the Revierry Petitioner in R.P. 15/zoog RP Nos.r+zo+/2ool, t5, ti/"2oos & CM Nos.ro 5o+/qool, 557, 558,598, 5.99, 600,2770,4t4t, 12584, wSAS/ZOOS iuWP (C)No.239s-53/zoo'WP(C)No.rro+g/e.ocig &CMNo.10szt/zoo Puge 3 of t.6 : ,.,- -- -,.-.:------. --.- .Arora and Ms. S€ema Arora (Responclents) and' Mr:. Roshan LaI Jain (Petitioner). Mr. Sachin Puri, Advocate with Ms. Kaclambari, Advochte and Mr. K. Siddiqr-ri, Aclv. for the petitioner in R.Pn L7 /zoos. K Mr. Rajesh (UDC) with record. a) \ .U CORANI:- T{ON'EI-E MR.. NIST'XCE A.K. SIKRX HON'tsI-E MR.. JUSTXCE MANNIOI{AN SINGI{ 1. Whether Reporters of Local nev/spapers may be allou,ed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether'the Jr-rdgmeht should be reported in the Digest? ' i*A.K. StrKRtr, J.(ORA],) 1. Vicle judgment dated November 3,,2oo8, a bitch of u,rit petitions was disposed of Writ Petition (C) zssa/ 55/zool was treatd u: the lead matter. Three review petitions and various applications arei filed in this writ petition. Before s,e advert to the averments on the basis of which revierv is sor,rght, it rryor.rlcl be apposite to take. brief note of the controversy v,hich rvas cleciclecl vicle afores aid j r-rclgment. L 2. The parties in these writ petitions/revierv petitions ciaimecl to: the rnembers of the Shivaji.Corporate Housing Society. Twenty t\4,o (ze) members were expelled by the then Management of the Societ;r. (fbr the sahe of convenience, hereinaftert referriecl to as 'the responcLents'). Trventy three other members were indr-rcted as members in their place. The expellecl members challengecl their expr-rlsion by filing appropriate proceeclings before the Financial Commission, which is .revival ar-rthority. Expulsion v,as set RP Nos.r.!?64./2008, t5, tt/zoos & CM Nos.16 504/2008, 557, 558,598, 599, 600, 2770, 4r+r, 12584, tc.5e5/ q,oos in wP (c) No:z5Ss- 53/2005Wp(C) No. r 104,e/2ooe'& iM No. rogszlooo Page a of t6 Ms. Savita Prabhar, Advocate for Mr-.'K.L. Arora, B.B. . asicle ancl'they were clirected to be reinstated/treated as valid members cjf the society. On the other hancl, qua the persons rvho were inclr-rcted in their 1D Vv ' place,.it. rvas held that they were not vziiidly admittecl as members of th{ V society. Various proceedings carhe to be filed at various stages ancl it is not necessary to refer to those in detail. Suflice it to say that all these rn,ere the sr-rb;ect matter of tire aforesaid rvrit petitigns. I; the juctgment dated November 3, 2oO8 this Court gave foilowing findings:- o,-^rrol /o-^rrloi^ fi.n- l\fo-hor.c -rroo illo-"] (t) Removal/expulsion of respondents from Members was illegal more particr-rlarly when it was set asicle by the Financial Commissioner. | (z) Trventy three ' -"-b.r.l enrollecl in .t 4.\ their place \l/ere ' improperly indr"rcted as members, inasmuch as,.not only there were no vacancies, even the procech-rre for admitting them as members was n.ot followecl as no prior approrral of the Registrar was taken. Rather such an approval was applied . but specifically refusejd by the Registrar (s) Notwithstanding the fact these persons \'/ere wrongly incluctecl as members, they were allotted the flats and on the other hand, the r:esponclents herein were not incluclecl in the dr;arv of plots. This aliotment in favor-rr of neu,ly inclucted r. members v,as held to be illegal. 3. In these circumstances, the writ.petition rvas disposetl of rvith the followin g directions :- "(n) The petitioners in WP(C) No.2338-59/zoo5 ancl others, namely, 22 persons who were pr-rrporteclly inclucted on 11.4.1999, shall hanclover the possession of . the flats to the Adrninisttator within four montl-rs fi om toclay. RP Nos.r{,?6,1,/2.oos, ts, tt/2,oos & CM Nos.16so+/2,ooe, 557, 558,598, 599, 600,2770,414r, r258q, |2,SSS/ZOOS ,inWP(C)No.z.3ss-,s/sooswP(C)No.rrc+s/2,oos &CMNo.rosc.t/Q.oo Page 5 of te " (b) These flats shail be allottecl to those 22 members r,r'ho were expelled, subject to the condition that they have paid entire consideration'and no further amount is clue fto* thern. For this purpose, draw of lots in respect oi ' these 22 flats for tb.e said zz members shall be helcl by.the . Adrninistrator. Thereafter, possession shall be hanclecl over to these metnbers. (.) In order to accommodate the petitioners ancl other . similarly situated persons (zg in number), 'the newly incluctecl members, rve issue the following clirections:- (.i) Dr-re to the increase in the FAR there is an increase in the membership from I2o. to I38. Therefoie, 18 persons czih be accommodated by enrollment thereof as ' . new members ortof qg persons. By drarv of lots 1B out.of these 22 persons shall be selected and the said list shall be forwarclecl by the Society to the Regisb:ar, who shall approve their membership. Remaining four persons shall be given refund of the amount paid by thern. We are nbt granting any interest on this amount as ch-rring all this . periocl they enjoyecl use and occupation of the flats. (cii) The Aclministrator shall submit plans for construction of aclditional flats to MCOZDnA rn,ithin trvo weelts fi'om today. These. shall be approvecl ivithin six weeks of their sr-rbmission, subject to fulfillmint of other forrhalities. Thereafter, the Society shall start ' construction of the new flats and on compietion of those flats, possession thereof shail be hancled over to the nervly recmitecl members. (ciii) These 18 pelsoni who u'ere inductecl as members on 11.,1.1999 had paicl the entire.consicler'ation in respect of these flats by the end of year 2000 rvhen the clraw of lots rvas helcl on 3L.L2.2OOO. Therefore, they rvor-rld only pay the additional cost incurred on the constrr-rction of these flats meaning thereby fi om the total construction cost of the new flats, the amount alreacly paicl by them shall be adiusted and the balance amount shali be sharecl , by thele 1d persons in equal proportion or in the alternative Iir case these '18 persons are not agreeable to new constructions at their cost in the manner proviclecl above, it rvouid be open to them to seek refund of the amount paicl by them. These persons shall exercise their option in this behalf within'two weelts fi'om today to enable the Aclministrator to proceed further in the rnatter accorclingly." RP Nos.14.?6 +/2OOB, t5, n/qOOO & cM.Nos.tO 5O+/COOS, 557, 558,598, 599, 600,2770,414r, 1258+, 12585/2009 in WP (C) No.2338- |s/aoo'WP(C) No.r rchs/9;oos & CM No.l0s9l /"2o0 \ r; Pagd 6 ofr6 . 4,. The review petitioris are fiIed by those members rryho s,ele inch-rcte rl.rY "). after the expr-rlsion of the responclents and,are allottecl the flats. They or" / sixteen in number. It woulcl be relevant to mention at this stage that thor-rgh tq'enty three (es) persons were inclucted as members ancl theii- membership was not sanctioned by the Registrar of the Society, ali of'them dicl not challenge the decjsion of tire lower ar-rthorities instead Writ Petition No. 2338-59/2ool was fiIecl only by 16 persons. Remaining seven cUcl not come to the Court at all. Out of those seven, three- have now approachecl ancl have- filecl;evierv petitions (i.e. RP ts/zoog & dp r l/zooo). Thr-rs even as orl ; . toclay, u'e h.ave'only nineteen (to) persons rryho were inclurctecl after the expr-rlsion of the rbspondentS. Other four persons,. obviously, acceptecl the ' clecision of the lower authorities that their enrollment.was ilIegal. ) u,oulil like to point out at this stage that ""-, tq,enty trvo 5. We alsc expeliecl members namely the respondents herein, seven were alreacly allotted tlre flats. Thus those who at'e not allotted flats,'out of those trventy two (zz), ale only fifteen (ts) in nnmber. 16. Originally, one hr-rndred and trryenty (120) members \4'ere enrolled as there was pro\/ision of constnuction of one hr-rndred and trventy flats. Or-rt of tliis I2O members, 22 members were expelled as aforesajcl ancl other persons tahen their pIace. The society had allotted, initially, flats to 94, persons which list was approved by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies as rvell. Certain members rvho had puia the amount br-rt were still not allottecl. RP Nos.r+zo +/zooe, ts, tt/coog & cM Nos.16 so+/2,ooa, 551, 558,598, 599, 600, 2770, +74r, 12584, p5e5/2,OOg in WP (C)No.zs38-53/aoo'WP(C)No.tto+o lz,oos & CM No.10e2?/200 Page z of t6 They were also not in the list of those who were expellecl. In these proceeclings w.e are concerned with two such persons namely Mr. Roshan LaI Jain (Membership no. 67) and Mr. Pawan Itr-rmar Arora (Mernbership No.3s1). 7.'. Rerrierry Petition no. 14,764/2oo8 is fiIecl by those sixteen petitioners vvho v,ere tn 2338-59 of 2oo5. Review Petition no. t5/2009 is filed by Smt. G. Alarracli, who had not approached the Court earlier. Review Petition no. t7/Qoog is preferred by two persons namely Bishan Su'aroop Vats ancl S, Sethi rvho had also not approached'the Cor-rrt earlier. Writ Petition (C) lro,J,:g/2009 is fiIed by one Shri Roshai Lai Jain. ^; Though there is hardly any challenge to the findings given in the jLrdgment dated November 3,2OOB holding that removal/ expr-rlsion of . re.spondents from their membership was illegal and the enrollment of twenty . three p'ersons in their place was improper or illegal, the griev.ance of these revierv petitioner. relate to the directions which are. girren'in the said .jr,rclgment. '.Primarily, it"is stated that there sho'r-rlcl nbt be calte-bianche clirections to the review petitioners to hand over the pcissesgion of flats to the rAclministrator shoulcl be reyiewed. In its place, review petitioners harre triecl to convince this Cor-rrt that there can be other mor€ eqr-ritable formr-r1a for accommoclating all the concerned persons. In this behalf, they harre submittecl that heeping in view the facts of the case of each such member-. falling in either category,'prioritization shor-rid be clone i.e. the manner jn u,hich all these persons shourlcl b. u..o*modatecl fixing the priority/merit. RP Nos.r+zo q/Q,oos, ru, rrtnaon& CM Nos.t6 5o4/2oo:, 557, 558,59S, 599, 600,2770,4,r4r, 12584, 12585/2009 in wP (c)No.zes8-53l2o05wP(c) No.r \O+d/9,OOS & cM No.rO S|.t /2,0O Pagef of t6 o I 9. The counsel for various parties rn'ei'e hearcl fi om time to time .on this aspect and ch-rring the disct-tssions, consensLls emerged. for allotment of AP\ 5\ existilrg flats consfrrtcfion of nerv flats and allotrncnt nf ncrrr flnfc fn tll.roo / \ eristing flats, construction of new flats and aliotment of nerv flats to those members who wolrld be left or"rt. All these proceeclings, vrz., review. petitions, rvrit petitions and miscellaneous applicatipns are thLrs disposecl of rvith the follorving consent order. We may note that most of the parties were present in the Cor-rrt at the time when these discussions tooh place and, they have given their consent to the following terms: (t) We shall first lake up the case of Roshan LaI Jain and Pawan Kumar Arora. In respect of Roslian Lal Jain, it is statecl that he vuas not allottecl the flat since he u,as in defar-rlt. Roshal Lal Jain had committed defar-rlt in making ' the payments. That was the reason he v,as not initially, ' allottecl the flat. His plea was, horvever, that he rvas not sent demand notice for making payment ancl because of this reason .he could not make the payment for vrhich he rvas . not to be blamed. Against non allotment, he approached the Registrar of cooperative societies. Dispr-rte. ,"1, referrecl to lhe'Arbitrato, rn,ho passecl the arvai'cl clirecting Roshal LaI Jain to make the payment of the outstancling amonnt alongwith interest. That ambunt has'since been paid. It is, therefore, agreed'that for allotment of flat to him. RP Nos.r.l?6 +/eool, ts, tt/eoog& CM Nos.ro so*/iQ.oos, 557, 558,598, 599, 600,277O,41'],I, t258+, t2.SA5/TOOS in wP (c) No,233S-55/20O5wP(c) No.r rcq,g/2,OOg & CM No.rOSat /2,o0 there is no impecliment' Page s of te (2) In so far as Pawan Kumar Arora is concernecl, it is / conceded even by the review petitioner that he has already n ) may payment o, Of. 7,68,000/-. It is also statecl by the / ) revierv petitioner that his name for allotment wis approvecl by the Registrar way back tn 9.7.2OO3. Therefore, he is also entitled to the allotme4t of flat as rryell as immediate possessron. (3) Trventy three members who rryere indr-rctecl after the expulsion of the respondents are occupying the flats. , In the juclgment datecl November 3, 2oo1, this fact lias been :!.^" taken note of Due to the increase in the FAR, Membership . is increasecl fi om reo to 19 g and, therefore, 1g rnore . persbns can be accommodated. Directions to the Administrator rvas given to take step for constrnction of the flats so that 18 more persons out of these 23 persons ' are accommodated. 'As pointed or-rt above, for.rr or-rt of these 23 persons never approached. Further, three persons have { approached for the first time in the proceeding'r in the Fligh Court by rvay of review petitions oniy. Therefore, it,is agreed sixteen persons who h.1ve been agitating their . tnatter rvor-r]d be accommodated first and the three revierv petitioner would be accommodated only thereafter. RP Nos. 14,76 4/ zoo8, t5, t7 / zoog & CM Nos.16 5o+/ ")ool, 557, 558,598, 599, 600,2770,41,11, 12584, |Z,SAS/2,OOS in WP (C) No.z3ss- 5s /2o05Y,rc(C) No. r ro+sle,oos & CM No.l0 sq,t /e,oo t_ I'age 1O ot 16 (+) It is thr-rs agreed that 17, responclents s,onlcl be InY accommoclated in the first instance. thereafterui*t..n J pers.ons rryho were the petitioners in rvrit petition qggg- 5g/o5 and at the end, the three persons rvho''have approached by -way of review petition r7/zoog and ' 15/2009. . : (5) Since it is agreed that 17 members i.e. thJ . respondents will be given allotment by the society immediately, the following flats fi om the follorvi'g members- rvill be immediately got vacated 'ancl in'ill. be allottecl to the aforesaid 17 persons:- s]. No. Name Rev. Pet. No. Flat No. Staturs I Jaicler. Dahiya 10 B-t/t Shri Dinesh Rana u'as for-rnd to be in possession as per the report of the local commissioners. 2. Abheshek Kumar Review petitioner, br-rt did not fiIe the writ petition B-t/s Locltecl since allotted. aJ. I{arish Kumar Sethi ReView petitioner, but did not fiie the writ petition B-q./ t Has 'indr-rcted tenant vide agreement to sell datecl o1.od.2oo6 ' 4. Ms. Shahuntala Bhagat 8 B-s/,2 Ms. Ritur u'as found to be in possession since 2008 5. Prakshrvati Rathi T2 B-s/t Ms. but Allta \4/as founci, slre could not qrve' RP Nos.r+ze +/9008, t5, tz /9.oo9 & cM Nos.r6 50+/soos, 557, 558, 598, 599, 600, 277O,4,1.1,1, 1258+, |?,SSS/9,OOS in WP (C) No.zsss-53/2ooswP(C)No.tto+o /coos &. CM No.loeq?/qoo Page It of f O ' ( convincing ans\ Ier abor"rt her'relationshit' with the uetitioner. Vishnr-r Sarup Vats Review petitioner, but did not file the writ petition B-+/ z Dr. N.K. Kar-rl was for"rnd 'to be in possession. ,-7,. Mrs. G. Ahlawadhi Review petitioner, but did not file the writ petition B-a/z B.B. Jain, was for-rnd to be'a tenant since 2OO5.- o6 I Ms. Divya Syal Review petitioner, br-rt did not fiIe writ petition Radhey Syal is the then Secretary. of the society B-6/ s Locked (6) Besides this, z flats will be vacated fiom the trvo non- members, who did not even challenge the order of the RCS or of the Financial commissioner. one flat wilr be got vacated fi om smt. santosh Bagri, r'uhose name has not been cleared ancl her name has not been approved by the RCS till aa' date and she h3r not challengecl or initiatecl any 'proceedings in this behalf. One flat is lying vacant rvith the society and is being used as its office. Thus, in'a1r, 12 flats ' will be available for al.lotment and hancling over of a 'possession immediately to the said r7 members. RP Nos.l.r,z6,tu/zoo}, tS, tt/e}og & CM Nos.l6 SO+/Q,oos, . ' 557, 558, 598, 599, 600, 27'7O,.t14.1, 1258+, p5e5/zoog in WP (C) No.zsso-53l2oo5wP(C) No.r ro+s/soog & CM No.ro ser /Doo page t2 of 16 (T) Five flats will be taken or-rt for allotment to the members.by nclr-rcting a clraw' amongst the remaining 12 . non- members. As far as these five members'are concernecl, they ' rryill be given a notional.ancl constructive possession of their respective flats. They will be cleemed to be the owners of the said flats w.e.f. the date of. aliotment. Howerrer. f ' possession of the flats will be given to them'on or before. 3 i't October, 2oII by the respective occupants/ non- members. Dr-rring this period,.these. no.n-members rn,ill be treated as licencee ancl they pay a sLrm of { 1O,OOO/- month {-- on account of use and occupation charges to the respective . allottebs vuith effect from September, 2010. These non- members/occr-rpants wili give an r,rndertaking to this ' Hon'ble'Cor-rrt that, they will hand over the vacant ancl ' peaceful possession of their respective flats by tlie aforesaid . date, rvithciut any objections ancl demur; ,They v,ill also ' undertake to keep on paying the use/occr-rpation charges as '! 1' aforesaid on or: before Tth clay of every month. In.case of defaLrlt of two consecutive months, they will liand over the vacant possession forthrvith to the allottees. They ivill also. heep on paying the electricity, rvater and other charges foi this periocl. The vacant possession of the flat rryiil be'given : RP Nos.14.z6 q,/e,oos, ts, v/qo6s &CM Nos.16 50+/2008, r 55?, 558, 598, 599, 600, 2770,4141,12584', |Z1SS/ZOOS in wP (c) No.2338- |s/e}OswP(c) No.r rc+s/2.oos & cM No.ro se,t/2,00 Page 13 of 16 r' irrespective of the construction and completion of nerv flats 0 \ .r- as aforesaid. 4l \ T1 . (B) Or-rt of the aforesziicl flats which become available, only trvo flats are in HIG category. However, there are more persons among the respondents rvho hacl appliect for HIG ' Flats F.o* respond.ents are represented by Ms. Sr-rnita itrabhakar and two by Mr. Poddar. Both the cor-rnse1 are .c1aimin,gthattheirc1ientsshou1clbegivenpriority. these circr-rmstance3, surggestion was mootecl that two HIG flats rvhich become availabie'can be allotted by Draw of L>- Lots among the six persons. This is, horryever, not acceptable to Ms. Prabhakar. In these circumstances; we are leaving this.issue open for the parties to .get the jssr-re rminecl in the appropriate proceedings as to who rryill have prior claim for allotment of these two HIG Flats. . New flats which are to be constructed, many of : those wor-rlcl be in HIG category ancl at that stage all {- persons who have applied in HIG category can be accommodated. Therefore, it woulcl be open to the other responclent. *ho are to be allotted HIG to occr-rpy MIG Fiats for time beingand thereafter shift to newly construct HIG Flats. . ' RP Nos.r+zo+/doo8, 15, tt/zoos &CMNos.t65o+/2,oos, 557, 558,598, 599, 600,277O,4141, 19584, p5A5/COOS inwP(c)No.essS-53/aOO'wP(c)No.rtOcs/2,OOs&cMNo.rOSal/"2OO Paget+oft6 (e) With regard to construction of nerv fuits, learnecl cor-rnsel for the Aclministrator pointed or-rt that he hacl received one feasibility report for the proposed additional 16 flats in the Society from the Architect Organic India in rryhich he has submitted that 12 HIG F1ats alongwith 2 lifts can be constructecl on tlie 'C' shape bloclt (Al to A-o) andl similarly four MIG Flats alongrvith one lift'can be constmcted one a linear bloch (B-S to B-o) ancl now the construction cost is rech-rcecl from { 9,06,00,0oo/- to 2,B3,oo,ooo/- The Architect' fr,rrther sr-rbmittecl that arouncl.one and a.half year is reqr-rirecl for completing the construction after sanction fi om the local authorities. i \> (to) To obviate any chances of future dispute,.the Aclministrator can seek options for HIG/MIG flats who are to be accommodatecl . in nev/ co.nstn-rctecl flats ancl flats can be construct accorclingly. The learned counsel for the sobiety.informs that approximately < 1.35 crores are the funds available with the Society. t d lac's will be ltept apart for making. day to.day expenses and t t.go crores' rryor,rlcl be contribr-rted for the construction of the flats. . The remaining amount shall be contribr-rted by the.revierv petitioners and others who are going to be accommoclated' in these new flats in eqr-ral proportion. The aclministrator can RP Nos.ra?6+/2,oos, t5, tt /2.oos & CM Nos.ro so+/9,ooa, 557 , 558,598, 599, 600, 2770, 4l+1, 1258+, 12585/2009 in WP (C) No.z338- ss/s,oosWT(C)No.rro+e. /e,oos UCM No.roez?/zoo Pagr 15 of rO 1 tl *\ convene a meeting of these persons in order to lrnow their preference. (t t) The Registrar of Cooperative Societies wor-rLd increase the strength of the Society from 138 to 148. (tz) It is agreed that none of the members or non-members will continire to prosecute a.ny proceedings against each other, including the proceedings before the Financial Commissioner rega.ding dual membership. In any case, it is agreed that any pending proceedings or. complaints or any other existing litigation between the parties will