HC for dissolving DELHI Co-operative Tribunal
REJIMON C K
The Tribunal, headed by a retired district judge, decides appeals against the orders of Registrar of Co-operative Societies or arbitrators in matters relating to group housing societies in Delhi. Such matters involve registration of a society, election, audit, inspection, dispute resolution, investment of funds, etc.
Opining that having the present Tribunal was as good as having none, a bench of Justices S K Kaul and Rajiv Shakdher has sought a response from the Delhi government over the procedure to recall its present members.
“It is as good as not having a tribunal when all its orders are either set aside or are remanded back. It is clearly unable to discharge its functions. Tell us the procedure to recall its members, for we may have to pass orders for reconstituting the Tribunal,” the bench told Najmi Waziri, government’s standing counsel.
The court had earlier underlined the “unacceptable” modus operandi of the Tribunal, while hearing an appeal against the Tribunal’s order. The parties are asked to submit soft copies of their arguments, which are then entered into the computer. Subsequently, a final order is passed by the Tribunal wherein the pleadings by the parties are simply reproduced by copying and pasting them and a conclusion of merely a few lines are typed out with minimal modification.
The court was further informed about the lack of stenographers in the Tribunal. It, however, said: “Despite the inadequacies, the tribunal, in our view, cannot conduct judicial proceedings in such a cavalier manner.” The bench said the tribunal, instead of reducing such proceedings into a “mere ritual,” should have highlighted its difficulties to the authorities concerned or the Chief Justice of this court.
Waziri was then called upon to look into the matter. The standing counsel was also asked to obtain from the Tribunal copies of all the orders passed by it in the last six months for vetting them.
On Monday, Waziri submitted the government’s report, stating that while vacancy of stenographers was being filled up and three persons have been already selected, issues relating to the 87 judgments passed in the last six months involved serious considerations since these orders were bereft of judicial reasoning. “The opinion is that they must have elaborated reasons to decide cases. Absence of reasons or discussions with respect to contentions of parties could leave a sense of disquiet or injustice and they will tend to move higher forum,” the report read.
Concurring, the bench held that while the Tribunal was created to sort some issues at its level, it in fact was enhancing the workload of the courts too by passing such orders.
“It is headed by a retired judicial officer but judicious mind is reflected nowhere in the judgments,” noted the bench, while asking Waziri to come back on the next date to apprise them about the procedure stipulated to disband the Tribunal by recalling its members and then reconstitute it properly.
--
Ashok Chaitanya
Similar comment by same Division Bench of Delhi High Court in one of my case too. Order is extracted below:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
W.P.(C) 1695/2012 and CM No.3724/2012 (Stay)
DELHI STATE NEWSPAPER EMPLOYEES
FEDERATION CGHS LTD ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ashok Chaitanya, Adv.
versus
REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES and ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. V.K. Tandon and Mr. Sanjeev Narula,
Advs. for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
O R D E R
26.03.2012
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order
of the Delhi Co-operative Tribunal (for short ?the Tribunal?) dated
25.11.2011 does not deal with any of the pleas of the petitioner
including of the appeal being barred by time. He further submits that
the claims are not referable to arbitration as they are beyond the period
of six (6) years from the date when the members resigned and even took
back their initial amounts.
We find from a perusal of the impugned order that this is one more
in the series of orders passed by the Tribunal with complete non-
application of mind and devoid of any reasoning. We have commented on
this aspect in WP (C) No.1207/2012 now listed for directions on 28.3.2012
so that a system can be put in place.
Let notice issue to the respondents to show cause as to why rule
nisi be not issued returnable on 30.4.2012.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1 accepts notice.
Respondents 2 to 8 be served dasti. Respondent No.9 be served
through ordinary process, registered AD post and courier.
It is directed that till the next date of hearing the operation of
the impugned order dated 25.11.2011 of the Tribunal is stayed.
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.
MARCH 26, 2012
--
Note:
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Dwarka-residen...@googlegroups.com