1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 520 of 2023 Decided on: 23.07.2026 Kamal Kishore …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P and others ..Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ram Krishan Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 3. Mr. Ajay Kumar Lahota, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge CMP No.17989/2026 Allowed and to stand disposed of. CWP No.520/2023 With consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter has been heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner’s grievance is to the decision taken by the Regulatory Committee on 20.12.2021 (Annexure P-1) under the Chairmanship of respondent No.2 whereby the petitioner’s application for membership of respondent No.4-Society was rejected on the ground that he was not 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 in possession of land user certificate as the land that was acquired belongs to his father who was stated to be member of another Corporation Society. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon Sushil Kumar Verma Versus State of H.P. and Others2, wherein it was, inter alia, held that Regulatory Committee has no role to decide the issue of membership. The said issue can be decided only by the Co-operative Society in terms of its bye-laws. This was so held by placing reliance upon The Baghal Land Looser Transport Cooperative Society Versus State of H.P. & Ors.3. Paras relevant to the context are as under:- “19. Interestingly, resolution dated 12.12.2023 (Annexure P-12) suggests that afore Society while deciding not to give membership to new members till the time work of the Society increases, permitted 18 members, who were not members, but had purchased vehicle to ply their vehicles through respondent No.3-Society, if it is so, petitioner, who had been approaching respondent No.3- Society for membership for quite long, otherwise could not have been denied membership. Otherwise also, this Court is persuaded to agree with Mr. J.L. Bhardwaj, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner that Regulatory Committee has otherwise no role to decide the issue of membership, which can only be decided by the Cooperative Society, in terms of bye-laws. In this regard, reliance is placed upon judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.2022 of 2022, titled as The Baghal Land Looser Transport Cooperative Society Vs. State of H.P. and Others, decided on 15.06.2024, relevant Para of which, reads as under: 2CWP No.4837/2024, decided on 27.05.2025. 3CWP No.2022/2022, decided on 15.06.2024. 3 “In view of the provisions existing in the Act, the Rules and the Bye-Laws, the Regulatory Committee does not have the jurisdiction to decide upon the membership of interested persons. The role of the Regulatory Committee, inter alia, can be to oversee, as to whether the new members inducted by the Co-operative Society are eligible to be the members or not; whether they fulfill the parameters laid down or not etc. In other words, the Regulatory Committee cannot sit over the statutory provisions and interfere with the specific powers given to the Co- operative Societies under the Act, the Rules and the Bye-Laws.” 20. Consequently, in view of detailed discussion made hereinabove as well as law taken into consideration, this Court finds merit in the present petition and accordingly the same is allowed. Impugned order dated 13.02.2024 (Annexure P-13) and resolution dated 12.12.2023 (Annexure P-12) are quashed and set-aside with the direction to respondent No.3-Society to enroll the petitioner as member of the Society and thereafter provide transportation work, as per bye-laws of the Society within a period of two months from today.” 4. In view of Sushil Kumar Verma2, the impugned decision dated 20.12.2021 (Annexure P-1) taken by the Regulatory Committee is set aside qua the petitioner. Respondent No.4-Society is directed to consider the application of the petitioner for membership of respondent No.4- Society in accordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 23, 2026 Judge yogesh