Case Note & Summary
The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by individuals seeking membership in a co-operative housing society. The petitioners claimed that the society had agreed to include them as members and that the State had approved their membership. They sought a writ of mandamus directing the State to communicate the approval or, alternatively, to grant approval. The court examined the facts and found that the petitioners had not established any legal right to membership. The society had not recommended their names, and there was no evidence of any approval by the State. The court held that without a clear legal right and a corresponding duty, a writ of mandamus cannot be issued. The petitions were dismissed as they lacked merit.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Enforceable Right - For a writ of mandamus to issue, the petitioner must establish a legal right and a corresponding legal duty on the part of the respondent - In the absence of any statutory or contractual right, no mandamus can be granted - The petitioners failed to demonstrate any right to membership in the society or any duty on the State to approve their membership (Paras 2-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners have an enforceable right to be admitted as members of a co-operative housing society and whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the State to communicate or grant approval to their membership.
Final Decision
Both writ petitions are dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Writ of Mandamus
- Co-operative Society membership
- Enforceable right
- Bye-laws
- Approval of membership
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (01) 152
Writ Petition No.1384 of 1991 along with Writ Petition No.2056 of 1991
Mr. K.S. Bapat for Petitioners; Mr. P.M. Mokashi, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1; Mr. V.D. Patil for Respondent Nos.2 and 3; Mr. C.J. Sawant for Respondent No.4
Suresh Prabhakar Sule & Anr. (in WP 1384/91); Dr. Prakash Pundalik Patil (in WP 2056/91)
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions seeking mandamus for membership in a co-operative housing society.
Remedy Sought
Writ of Mandamus directing the State to communicate approval of membership or to grant approval, and directing the society to recommend names for membership.
Filing Reason
Petitioners claimed the society agreed to include them as members and the State approved, but they were not allotted flats.
Issues
Whether the petitioners have an enforceable right to be admitted as members of the society.
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the State to communicate or grant approval of membership.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the society agreed to include them as members and the State approved.
Respondents contended that the petitioners have no legal right to membership and no approval was granted.
Ratio Decidendi
For a writ of mandamus to issue, the petitioner must establish a legal right and a corresponding legal duty on the part of the respondent. In the absence of any statutory or contractual right, no mandamus can be granted.
Judgment Excerpts
As the reliefs claimed and the facts in both the Petitions are similar, we have decided, with the consent of the parties, to dispose of both the Writ Petitions by this common judgment.
The Petitioners have sought a Writ of Mandamus directing the first Respondent to communicate the approval allegedly granted by the first Respondent to their names as members of Respondent No.2 and, in the alternative, directing the first Respondent to grant approval to their being members of Respondent No.2.
Procedural History
Writ Petitions filed in 1991; heard together and disposed of by common judgment on 14th January 2005.
