Vikramarthandan vs Indian Bank Staff Cooperative Group And Anr

Court
Delhi High Court

$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
rd
Date of decision: 3 September, 2026
th
Uploaded on: 7 September, 2026
# CNR No. DLHC010288142026
+ W.P.(C) 9019/2026
VIKRAMARTHANDAN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. S.S. Saini, Adv.
versus
INDIAN BANK STAFF COOPERATIVE
GROUP AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. A.K. Pandey, Adv. for R-1.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, inter alia , seeking directions to Respondent No.1-
Indian Bank Staff Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. (hereinafter, ‘the
Society’) to formulate a common parking policy in a time-bound manner
3. The case of the Petitioner, who is a senior citizen, is that he is facing
difficulty in finding a parking slot in the Society. It is stated that the residential
complex of the society comprises 120 residential apartments, however, only
50 parking slots have been allotted. The grievance of the Petitioner is that he
has not been allotted any parking slot, and he owns one car. Similarly placed
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPAK SINGH
Signing Date:07.09.2026
18:00:10
W.P.(C) 9019/2026 Page 1 of 4

senior citizens are also made to struggle to find even one parking slot and
other members are being permitted to have multiple parking slots.
4. It is prayed that a parking slot be allotted to the Petitioner, and that he
be accorded appropriate preference in the allotment process, having regard to
his age. It is also stated that the residents of the flats having multiple cars
ought not to be permitted to park more than one vehicle within the Society,
and that, even in respect of the common parking area, only one parking space
per flat ought to be allotted.
5. On the previous date i.e., 9th July, 2026, the Court had considered the
matter and ld. Counsel for the Society had sought time to seek instructions in
the matter. The Court directed as under:
“[...]
7. In the opinion of this Court, the matter may be
resolved amicably between the parties.
8. Accordingly, the matter is referred to the Delhi
High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre to
enable the parties to explore an amicable resolution.
The Society may also consider formulating an
appropriate policy governing the allotment of
parking spaces, with due preference being given to
senior citizens, including the Petitioner, as well as
other residents who may have disabilities or other
special needs.
9. List before the Delhi High Court Mediation and
Conciliation Centre on 15th July, 2026 at 11.am.”
6. In terms thereof, the Court considered that the matter be resolved
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPAK SINGH
Signing Date:07.09.2026
18:00:10
W.P.(C) 9019/2026 Page 2 of 4

amicably and, accordingly, the matter was referred to mediation before the
Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre for amicable resolution.
7. Today, ld. Counsels for the parties submit that the mediation has failed.
8. The Court has considered the matter. The issue in this case relates to a
parking dispute. The prayer is for formulating a common parking policy in a
time-bound manner.
9. This Court, while exercising writ jurisdiction, cannot go into the factual
issue as to how many parking slots are available and the manner in which the
policy ought to be framed by the Society. Instead of relegating the Petitioner
to avail remedies under Section 70, which could be long-drawn, in the opinion
of this Court, the RCS ought to intervene in such matters and enable a fair
policy being framed for ensuring parking slots are made available in an
equitable manner. The concerns of Senior citizens ought to be borne in mind
as they ought not to be made to struggle. One dedicated parking slot for each
of the members should be allotted by the Society and any surplus slots ought
to be used on a need-basis. If the Society’s Managing Committee is not acting
in a fair manner, the RCS ought to intervene and resolve the matter.
10. Accordingly, in the facts of this case, the following directions are
issued:
(i) It is directed that the RCS shall hear the Petitioner and the
Society’s Office Bearers and enable them to frame a formal parking
policy in terms of the directions above. A specific car parking space
shall be made available to the Petitioner.
(ii) Let the Petitioner and the Society’s Office Bearers appear before
th
the RCS on 15 September, 2026 at 11:30 AM .
(iii) If a formal parking policy is not framed within a period of two
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPAK SINGH
Signing Date:07.09.2026
18:00:10
W.P.(C) 9019/2026 Page 3 of 4

months, the Petitioner shall not be disturbed from parking one car in a
designated space, which shall be decided by the RCS.
11. The petition is disposed of. The pending applications, if any, are also
disposed of.
12. All rights and remedies of the parties are left open.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
VIKAS MAHAJAN
JUDGE
SEPTEMBER 3, 2026
aj/sm
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPAK SINGH
Signing Date:07.09.2026
18:00:10
W.P.(C) 9019/2026 Page 4 of 4