NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.4088 OF 2010

SMT. LAKSHMAMMA ....APPELLANT(s)

VERSUS

THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE  

DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR. ......RESPONDENT(s)

JUDGMENT

NAVIN SINHA, J.

The  appellant  assails  the  orders  of  the  Bangalore

Development Authority (hereinafter called as the “Authority”)

dated 15.11.2006 and 17.09.2003,  as affirmed by  the  High

Court.  The former declines to restore “khata” in the name of

the  appellant,  and  the  latter  cancels  the  “khata”  standing

earlier in the name of the appellant’s vendor.

1

2. The  Scheduled  Caste  (Harijan)  House  Building

Co-operative  Society  Limited  (hereinafter  called  as  the

“Society”), respondent no.2, was allotted 4 acres 23 guntas of

land  in  Survey  No.32  of  Marenahalli  for  development  of

residential layout for its members.  Bye law No.5(iii) restricted

membership of the Society to Scheduled Caste persons only.

The  Society  allotted  and  sold  site  no.10  to  the  appellant’s

vendor on 24.12.1985.  The appellant purchased the same on

29.08.2005 by a registered sale deed.  Subsequently, one P.

Venugopal, who was the Secretary of the Society from 1983 to

1988, after expiry of his term, allotted and registered sites to

persons who were not members of the Society in 1997, and

which  included  one  S.  Vasanth  Raj,  and  to  whom  the

appellant’s plot was resold.

3. The allotments so made in 1997 came to be cancelled by

the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies on 25.03.1998.

The appeal preferred by S. Vasanth Raj before the Karnataka

2

Appellate  Tribunal  was  dismissed  as  withdrawn  on

03.08.2006.

4.   The  Registrar  of  Co-operative  Societies,  by his  order

dated 02.01.1997, on a challenge by the Society, while holding

that membership had to be restricted to persons belonging to

the scheduled caste only, directed that the existing members

of  the  Society  irrespective  of  caste,  and  which  included

persons like the appellant, shall continue to enjoy all rights

and privileges available  to the  members of  the  Society.  The

High Court declined interference by order dated 10.02.2006

and  inter  alia  directed  that  all  cancellation  deeds  stood

cancelled,  with directions to the Sub-Registrar to delete the

cancellation deeds from the register.

5. The  appellant  then  represented  to  the  Authority  for

restoration of the “khata” in her name.  The impugned order

dated 15.11.2006 declined her request on the ground that she

3

did  not  belong  to  the  scheduled  caste,  and  therefore,  her

membership had been cancelled.

6. The facts of the case, as noticed above, have not been

disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the Authority.

If that be so, the allotments made by the Society to persons

not belonging to scheduled caste stood saved by order of the

Registrar  of  Co-operative  Societies  dated  02.01.1997  as

affirmed by the High Court on 10.02.2006.  It hardly needs

further  elucidation  that  the  grounds  mentioned  in  the

impugned  order  are  completely  nonest.  The  order  therefore

stands  vitiated  by  complete  non-application  of  mind.  The

allotments by the  then Secretary P.  Venugopal  having been

held  to  be  illegal  and  without  authority,  the  order  dated

17.09.2003 is also unsustainable, additionally in view of the

withdrawal of his appeal by Vasanth Raj on 03.08.2006.

4

7. The  order  of  the  High  Court  is,  therefore,  held  to  be

unsustainable, and is set aside.  The Authority shall restore

“Khata” in the name of the appellant.  

8. The appeal is allowed.

……………………….J.  (Aurn Mishra)

………………………..J.    (Navin Sinha)  

New Delhi,

March 28, 2018

5