Delhi Registrar restores members’ rights over stilt parking in Dwarka Housing Society
The Registrar of Cooperative Societies (RCS), Delhi, has set aside resolutions passed by Shakti Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd, Dwarka, declaring them illegal and unenforceable insofar as they sought to extinguish members’ vested rights over stilt parking spaces.
In its order dated July 7, 2026, the RCS held that stilt parking spaces allotted to members between 2000-2003, after payment of approximately `77,000 per slot, are transferable and inheritable along with the flats.
The dispute arose from resolutions adopted in the Society’s Annual General Body Meetings of 2019 and 2020, which mandated that stilt parking be treated as part of the common areas and required surrender of such spaces upon transfer of flats. Members led by Dr Aruna challenged these resolutions, contending that stilt parking had been separately allotted for consideration nearly two decades earlier.
RCS Krishna Kumar Singh (IAS) observed that the Society had collected separate payments, issued receipts and allotment letters, and permitted exclusive use of stilt parking for over 20 years. “Rights which have crystallised through contractual allotment, payment of consideration and long-standing possession acquire a vested character and cannot subsequently be divested by a mere resolution of the General Body,” said the order.
The RCS relied on the principles laid down in the Delhi High Court’s ruling in Vijay Gupta vs Nav Nirman CGHS Ltd, which held that once a cooperative society has allotted parking spaces for consideration and such allotments have remained acted upon over a long period, the society cannot subsequently divest members of their accrued rights by passing a resolution. The RCS further clarified that reliance on the Supreme Court’s judgement in Dr GN Khajuria vs DDA was misplaced, as the factual and legal context was distinguishable. The order directs Shakti CGHS Ltd to restore original stilt parking allotments within 15 days; recognise such allotments in all future transfers, succession, or membership changes; and avoid any further action inconsistent with the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 and Rules, 2007. The complaint was accordingly allowed, providing relief to members who had contested the society’s attempt to redefine their property rights.
The decision underscores that cooperative governance must remain fair, reasonable, and consistent with statutory principles and cannot override vested contractual rights.
