' The dispute in this case relates to membership of the Revenue Employees Cooperative Housing Society, Lahore. The Circle Registrar Cooperative Societies, Lahore, with powers of Registrar, by order dated 13-5-1990 declared the petitioner a bona fide member of the Society and entitled to allotment of one Kanal plot. On appeal, the Secretary to the Government of the Punjab, Cooperative Department, Lahore, after hearing both the parties and perusing the record of the Society by order dated 23-5-1991, recorded a finding of fact that there was no resolution of Managing Committee/General Meeting t. Show show that the petitioner was admitted as a member. It was also held that register of membership does not contain the name of the petitioner.
2. Syed Jamshed Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was a Tehsildar in Grade 16 posted at Lahore, and therefore, by virtue of his posting he was entitled to be enrolled as member under bye-law No,6(i), which reads thus:- "5. The members shall consist of:-
(i) Revenue Officers of Grade 17 and above originally belonging to the Divisional/District/Sub- Divisional Administration and such Government employees posted in these offices as are liable to be posted to Lahore in routine.
(ii) Any other category of persons considered suitable for membership by the Managing Committee unanimously.
(iii) Owners of land in the area of the Society opting for allotment of plots instead of payment of market value."
' A bare perusal of clause (i) of bye-law No,5 shows that it applies to Revenue Officers of Grade-17 and above, who originally belong to the Divisional/District/Sub-Divisional Administration or "such other Government employees" posted or liable to be posted in Lahore. The phrase "such other Government employees" used in clause (i) of paragraph 5 could not be ignored but must be read as referring back to the preceding provisions. It, therefore, refers only to such other Government employees in Grade-17 and above posted in these offices or liable to be posted in Lahore. Referring Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes, Twelfth Edition, page 39, wherein it was observed:- "It may be pointed out that wherever the word "such" occurs in a section, it must not be ignored, but must be read as referring back to the preceding provisions, even though this gives rise to a result which appears anomalous."
' Here the petitioner is admittedly in Grade-16 and, therefore, his case is not covered by bye-law No, 5.
3. Syed Jemshed Ali next contended that in terms of bye-law No,7, the moment a person submits an application for membership, his application forms part of the register of members and on payment of admission fee of Rs,200, which is not refundable, he becomes member automatically.
The contention is misconceived. The question of eligibility of members of the Society is governed by bye-law No,5, which stipulates only three categories. First, Revenue Officers of Grade-17 and above originally belonging to the Divisional/District/Sub-Divisional Administration and such Government employees posted in these offices as are liable to be posted to Lahore in routine; secondly, any other category of persons considered suitable for membership by the Managing Committee unanimously; and thirdly, owners of land in the area of the Society opting for allotment of plots instead of payment of market value. Here no material has been placed on record of this Court to show that the petitioner was unanimously approved by the Managing Committee for membership of the Society. The petitioner also does not claim to be a member under clause (iii) of bye-law No,5.
Thus the petitioner is not eligible under any of the aforesaid categories.
4. Let me now deal with bye-law No,7, which reads thus:- "7. Application for membership shall be in writing in the prescribed form. Such applications will form a part of register of members. Every member, on admission, shall pay admission fee of Rs,200 which is not refundable alongwith the value of shares as determined under bye-law No,5."
' Suffice it to say, bye-law No,7 is not to be read in isolation and is to be construed like any other document reading it as a whole and giving to every part thereof a meaning consistent with the other provisions of the bye-laws and as far as possible the general provisions of the bye-laws should be construed so as to harmonize with all the others. Here reading the bye-laws as a whole, it would appear that submission of application and the manner in which it is to be dealt with is stated in bye-law No,7, but the question of eligibility of a member is governed by bye-law No,5.
Thus visualised, the mere fact that the application of the petitioner was accepted and he deposited the requisite fee, which was unrefundable, would not ipso facto confer upon him the membership of the society.
5. Syed Jamshed Ali Shah finally contended that the appellate authority examined the record of the case after hearing had been concluded without notice to the petitioner, and therefore, the order passed by him is violative of the principles of natural justice. Suffice it to say that this is a disputed question of fact which cannot be entertained in these proceedings.
Be that as it may, the petitioner is not found to be eligible for membership of the Society and, therefore, no interference is called for with the impugned order dated 23-5-1991 passed by the Secretary to the Government of the Punjab, Cooperative Department, Lahore. The petition, therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed, but there shall be no order as to costs.