Facts
The Petitioner, a member of the Mayur Bagh Cooperative Group Housing Society Limited (Membership No. 49), sought regularization of a "self-draw" of lots conducted for her flat (Flat No. 39)
Source reference: p. 1-2She was issued a share certificate in 1987 and a possession letter in 1994
Source reference: p. 1Despite receiving a No Objection Certificate in 1999, the flat was not regularized
Source reference: p. 2In March 2025, the DDA raised objections regarding the legality of the self-draw process—where the Society conducts the allotment without the oversight of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies (RCS)
Source reference: p. 2The Petitioner approached the High Court seeking a directive for regularization, whereas the RCS contended that no formal representation had been made to them
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether the self-draw of lots conducted by the Society prior to 2010 can be regularized by the RCS despite procedural irregularities
Source reference: p. 2-32. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the policy decision taken by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi regarding the regularization of self-draws in cooperative societies
Source reference: p. 3-5Law Applied
The court primarily applied the directive of the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi dated September 20, 2011, which permits the regularization of self-draws conducted by societies prior to 2010, provided the outcomes were accepted unanimously and no irregularities other than procedural ones existed
Source reference: p. 3The court further relied on the precedent established in Sh. Rajeev Saxena and Ors. v. Registrar of Co-operative Societies and Ors. (W.P.(C) 12218/2021), which held that members should not be deprived of property rights due to technical or procedural mistakes by the Society or the RCS, especially when the Lieutenant Governor's policy grants an opportunity for regularization
Source reference: p. 2, 4Reasoning
The court observed that the Petitioner has been in possession and held a share certificate for several decades, during which time the RCS failed to take a pragmatic view of the procedural lapse
Source reference: p. 1-2, 4Applying the rationale from Rajeev Saxena, the court noted that where self-draws were held with the consent of members and without ill-motive, they deserve regularization under the 2011 LG notification
Source reference: p. 3-4The court emphasized that the RCS should not compel members to "run from pillar to post" for technicalities if the allotment is otherwise genuine
Source reference: p. 4Consequently, since the Petitioner’s self-draw occurred well before the 2010 cutoff mentioned in the LG's decision, her case fell within the ambit of the regularization policy
Source reference: p. 5Holding
The court allowed the petition and directed the RCS to consider the Petitioner’s case for regularization
The RCS is ordered to verify the Petitioner’s documents, the genuineness of the draw, and the Society's records, and pass a final decision within two months
Source reference: p. 5The court further directed both the Petitioner and the Society to appear before the RCS on June 8, 2026, to facilitate this process
Source reference: p. 5Original Court PDF
Usha SharmavsGovernment Of Nct Of Delhi Through The Registrar Cooperative Socities And Ors.
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in