2004 (4) TMI 625 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Cancellation of letter dated 1.11.1988 by the Special Officer.
2. Entitlement of legal heirs to the possession of Flat No. A-2.
3. Maintainability of the writ petition.
4. Compliance with financial obligations and legal formalities.
5. Rights of legal heirs under the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 1983.
6. Validity of re-allotment of the flat by the Society.
7. Role and actions of the Special Officer.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Cancellation of Letter Dated 1.11.1988 by the Special Officer:
The appellant sought the cancellation of the letter dated 1.11.1988 issued by the Special Officer, which stated that the flat had been re-allotted due to the lack of a timely claim by the legal heirs. The court found that the Special Officer's action of re-allotting the flat without giving an opportunity to the legal heirs and without deciding who was entitled to the flat was improper, illegal, arbitrary, and motivated.

2. Entitlement of Legal Heirs to the Possession of Flat No. A-2:
The appellant argued that the legal heirs of the deceased member, Sati Prasanna Bhowmick, were entitled to inherit and be allotted the apartment. The court held that under Section 87 of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 1983, the flat constitutes heritable and transferable immovable property. The legal heirs are entitled to inherit the flat as per the mandatory provisions of the statutes, and the right, title, and interest of the deceased member in the apartment devolve upon his heirs.

3. Maintainability of the Writ Petition:
The respondents contended that the writ petition was not maintainable as the Society was not a State or an instrumentality of the State. However, the court concluded that the writ petition was maintainable since the Special Officer, appointed under the provisions of the Act, is a statutory officer and thus should be regarded as a public authority. Additionally, Article 226 of the Constitution extends to issuing directions to any person, not just public authorities.

4. Compliance with Financial Obligations and Legal Formalities:
The respondents argued that the father of the appellant had not paid the full amount for the flat, thus acquiring no right, title, or interest. The court noted that the appellant was ready and willing to pay the balance amount and comply with all formalities. The court found that the Society had not made any demand for money or communicated any liability regarding the flat during the lifetime of Sati Prasanna Bhowmick.

5. Rights of Legal Heirs under the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 1983:
The court examined Sections 79, 80, 82, 85, and 87 of the Act, which deal with the transfer and devolution of a deceased member's share or interest. The court emphasized that the preferential claim goes to the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased member in the absence of any nominee. The court concluded that the legal heirs were entitled to the flat as per the provisions of the Act and Rules.

6. Validity of Re-allotment of the Flat by the Society:
The court found that the re-allotment of the flat by the Special Officer to a stranger, without considering the legal heirs' claim, was illegal. The court noted that the flat had not been allotted to a third party and remained vacant. The court held that the Special Officer's action of re-allotting the flat without deciding the rightful claimant was improper and motivated.

7. Role and Actions of the Special Officer:
The Special Officer, appointed by the High Court, had issued letters demanding payment of dues and later re-allotted the flat due to the absence of a timely claim by the legal heirs. The court found that the Special Officer's actions were arbitrary and not in compliance with the legal provisions. The court held that the Special Officer, being a statutory functionary, should have considered the legal heirs' claim before re-allotting the flat.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court held that the legal heirs of the deceased member were entitled to inherit the flat as per the provisions of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 1983. The court found that the re-allotment of the flat by the Special Officer was illegal and arbitrary. The writ petition was deemed maintainable, and the court directed that the flat be allotted to the legal heirs of the deceased member.