By Accommodation Times Bureau
Office of The Registrar Cooperative Societies
Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi
Old Courts Building, Parliament Street:
New Delhi

No. r 47/lQa/Coop./R. C.SIPoIxy/1482- 1502 Dated 14/1 2199

Directive Under Rules 77 of Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 1973.

It has been brought to the notice of the undersigned during public hearing flours that the Managing Committee of Cooperative Group Housing/House Building Societies are charg­ing “Entry Fee” before handing over the possession of flat/plot or for issuing No Objection Certificate (NOC) required for conversion of leasehold to freehold.

Therefore, I, R.K. Srivastava, Registrar Cooperative Societies make it clear that none of the provisions of Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 1972 and Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 1973 empower for charging any amount in account of Entry Fee” in any form whatsoever and accordingly, I, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me under Rule 77 of Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 1973 do hereby direct all the Cooperative Group Housing/ House Building Societies not to charge any “Entry Fee” from the persons eligible for taking the possession of flat/plot in the respective Cooperative Society. Violation of this Directive will be viewed seriously and the President/Secretary of the concerned Society would be held responsible jointly and individually. Action will be taken against the Society under the provisions of the Act and Rules for any such violation.

This Directive will come into force with immediate effect.

Sd/-
(R.K. Shrivastava)
Registrar Cooperative Societies

Copy to:

1. President/Secretaries of all the Group Housing/House Building Societies through concerned Assistant Registrar.

2. Joint Registrars/Deputy Registrars/Assistant Registrars.

3. Sehkari Magazine for publication.

Sd/-
(BK. Shrivastava)
Registrar Cooperative Societies

By Accommodation Times Bureau
Shri Suresh Govind Zantey Vs. Mr.Madhukar Bhau Pansare and others. Bhagirath Condominium in Goregaon (E) Aug 29, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL (LODGING) NO.509 OF 2012
IN
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3496 OF 2011
IN
SUIT NO.2753 OF 2011

Shri Suresh Govind Zantey and others. … Appellants

Versus

Mr.Madhukar Bhau Pansare and others. … Respondents

Mr. Gaurav Joshi with F. Jain and Mr.Dinesh Shah, Tejas Shah i/by M/s. Lilani Shah & Co. for the appellants.
Ms.Rajni Iyer, Senior Advocate with Mr.Ibrahim Merchant i/by M/s. K.V. Aiayar & Associates for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr.Shailesh Shah, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. Dinkar Patil for respondent No.6.
Mr. P.Y. Ladekar, Court Receiver present.

CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & N.M. JAMDAR, J.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
P .C .
The appellants herein, original defendant Nos.1,2 and 3 have challenged the order dated 19 June 2012 of the learned trial Judge
of this Court in Notice of Motion No.3496 of 2011 in Suit No.2753 of 2011.

2. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein as President and Secretary of the Board of Managers of Bhagirath Condominium have filed the
above numbered suit.

3. The suit property is a building called “Bhagirath Condominium” in Goregaon (East), Mumbai which consists of 44 flats and
one garage. Therefore, there are 45 occupants in the suit building. The building is in a dilapidated condition. It was unanimously
decided by the occupants to redevelop the building after inviting tenders. The general body of the association resolved to enter into
an agreement with defendant No.7.
Accordingly, the redevelopment agreement has been entered into between the plaintiffs and other members of the Condominium
on the one hand and the defendant No.7 on the other hand, on 5 January 2010. Since defendant Nos.1 to 6 were not cooperating
with the other occupants and the developer for redevelopment work, the plaintiffs have filed the present suit for declaration that
defendant Nos.1 to 6 are bound by the decision taken by the association by majority.

4. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiffs filed notice of motion seeking reliefs that Court Receiver be appointed with power
under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code to execute the development agreement in terms of Exhibit “F” to the notice of
motion and to physically remove defendant Nos.1 to 6 and their family members occupying the suit flats and hand over vacant and
peaceful possession thereof to defendant No.7 the developer. The learned trial Judge has granted the above prayer and also an
additional prayer in terms of prayer clause (e) which is not necessary to be set out in the order which is proposed to be passed.

5. The contention of the appellants herein is that the resolution passed by the other occupants of the building by a majority does not
bind the dissenting members and that all resolutions of the occupants regarding redevelopment project must be passed unanimously.
The learned trial Judge rejected the above contention and held that resolution / decision passed / taken by a simple majority binds all
members of the condominium and allowed the notice of motion in terms of the above directions.

6. At the hearing of the appeal, Mr. Gaurav Joshi, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants will not
press the appeal if defendant No.7 offers to the appellants and other occupants total additional carpet area of 30% over and above
the carpet area presently in occupation of the appellants and other members, as in view of the amendment of the Development
Control Regulations, additional FSI including fungible FSI is available to the suit property. Mr. Joshi has invited our attention to
para 12 of the order of the learned trial Judge and also the appellants’ case in para 20 of the affidavit in reply indicating that the
appellants (defendant Nos.1 to 3) demanded an additional area of 30% carpet area instead of 15% additional carpet area offered by
defendant No.7.

7. Mr. Shailesh Shah, learned counsel for defendant No.7 developer states under instructions that defendant No.7 is ready to offer
total additional carpet area of 30% to all the members, over and above the existing carpet area, free of cost in lieu of all the claims of the
appellants and other members for additional carpet area. A letter dated 29 August 2012 signed by defendant No.7 is taken on record
and marked “X” for identification purposes. The learned counsel for defendant No.7 states that defendant No.7 is making the above
offer on condition that the appellants and all other occupants accept the decision of the occupants by a simple majority and that no special
majority is required for any resolution to be passed for the redevelopment project or any part thereof and on further condition that the
appellants execute the development agreement.

8. Mr.Joshi, learned counsel for the appellants states under instructions of all the three appellants who are present before the
Court, that in view of the offer of defendant No.7, appellants will accept any resolution which may be passed by the occupants by a
simple majority of those present and voting.

9. In view of the above consensus, we dismiss the appeal after recording the above statements made by the learned counsel for the
parties including the statement that defendant No.7 shall offer to all the occupants of the building Bhagirath Condominium 30% additional
carpet area over and above the existing carpet area, free of cost. We also direct that all the occupants of Bhagirath Condominium shall
execute the development agreement with defendant No.7 on the terms already incorporated in the development agreement executed
earlier, subject to the modification that the additional carpet area to be provided by defendant No.7 free of cost, shall be 30% instead of
15%.

10. The appeal accordingly stands disposed of in terms of the above arrangement and directions.

CHIEF JUSTICE

N.M. JAMDAR, J.

By Accommodation Times Bureau

Q 1. What is the minimum number of promoters required to join the registration proposal?

A. 60% of the flat purchasers/ promoters are required to join the registration proposal if building is constructed by builder/developer.
· 90% promoters are required to join the registration proposal for society of open plot type category.

Q 2. What is the minimum number of promoters required to sign the registration proposal?

A. 60% of the promoters who have joined the registration proposal are required to sign it.

Q 3. Whether Co-operative Housing Society having less than 10 units can be registered?

A. Cooperative Housing Society having less than 10 units can be registered subject to the following conditions:

· The built up area of each unit should not be more than 700 sq. ft.
· There should not be balance F.S.I
Q 4. What is the remedy available, if the builder does not register a Co-operative Housing Society?

A. Chief Promoter of the proposed society shall submit a registration proposal of the co-operative housing society to the concerned Registrar under the category of non- co-operation of builder.

Registrar may consider such a proposal for Registration on merit.

Q 5. What are the conditions for registration of Cooperative Housing Society in private building?

A. Conditions for registration of CHS in Private building

· Registering authority can register CHS on merit if 90% of the tenants join the registration proposal.
· Registering authority can register CHS on merit and with previous approval of State Government if 75% to 90% of the tenants join the registration proposal.
· Proposal for registration will not be entertained if percentage of tenants is below 75%
· The Tenant promoter joining the proposed CHS shall have to agree to contribute to the cost of flats of non joining tenants.
· In case tenants have created sub tenancy in terms of Rent Act, sub tenants and not the tenants be allowed to join the proposed CHS.
Q 6. Whether the Chief Promoters has got authority to withdraw the money deposited in the bank in the name of proposed CHS?

A. The Chief Promoter has got no power to withdraw such money.

Before registration of the Cooperative Housing Society, money can be withdrawn with the permission of the Registrar.

Q 7. What is the remedy available if the Registrar does not take any decision on registration proposal within a period of 2 months?

A. Failure to dispose of the registration proposal of a housing society within a period of two months, the Registrar has to submit the said registration proposal to the next higher authority within a period of 15 days from the date of expiry of two months.

On failure of such higher authority to dispose of the said registration proposal within two months from the date of receipt of the proposal to his office, the registration proposal shall be deemed to be registered under the provision of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960.

Q 8. What is the remedy available if the registration proposal is rejected?

A. Such rejection order can be challenged by filing appeal under section 152 of the M.C.S. Act 1960 before the Divisional Joint Registrar C.S. of the concerned Division.

Q 9. What are the circumstances for de-registration of a Cooperative Housing Society? And under which section?

A.· If the society is registered.
· On the misrepresentation made by the applicants, or
· The work of the society is completed or exhausted, or,
· The purpose for which the society has been registered is not served.
Such societies can be de-registered under the provision of Section 21-A of the M.C.S. Act 1960.

Q 10. Under what circumstances registration of the CHS can be canceled?

A. Registrar can cancel the registration of CHS under section 21 of the M.C.S. Act 1960. Under the following circumstances:

· If a CHS transfer the whole of its assets and liabilities to another society or.
· Amalgamates with another society, or
· Divides itself into two or more societies or,
· Liquidation proceedings are terminated under section 109.

Q 11. What are the types of CHS?

A. Rules 10 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 provides the following classification of the CHS

· Tenants’ ownership Co-operative Housing Society.
· Land is held on lease hold or free hold basis
· Houses are owned or are to be owned by member.
· Tenants Co-partnership Cooperative Housing Society.
· Both land and houses owned by society.
· Houses are allotted to members.
· Other Co-operative Housing Society.
· Houses mortgages societies
· Houses construction society.

Q 12. What fee is to be paid to the Government for registration of a Cooperative Housing Society?

A. Proposed society can made the payment towards government fee as applicable from time to time. The present registration fee is:

Tenant Co-partnership /ownership CHS – Rs. 2,500.00

Other (General ) CHS – Rs. 2,500.00

Q 13. When at least 20% of backward class members are required for registration of a Cooperative Housing society?

A. This condition is applicable for plot purchase type society under the following circumstances.

· When society intends to borrow fund for construction of building from State Government and/ or MHFC Limited.
· If land grant authority insists for such conditions.

Q 14. Whether promoters are required to submit their applications for membership to the Chief Promoter before registration of Cooperative Housing Society?

A. Yes, all the promoters should submit their application for membership to the Chief Promoter before registration so s to enable him to undertake about receipt of application for membership in the prescribed “Y” form to be submitted to the Registering Authority at the time of Registration.

Q 15. What remedy is a available if Chief Promoter does not deposit the share money collected from promoters in the Bank?

A. Failure of Chief Promoter in depositing share money collected from promoters of proposed CHS amounts to an offense u/s 146 of M.C.S. Act 1960.

Chief promoter can be prosecuted in the court of law with previous approval of Divisional Joint Registrar of concerned Division u/s 148.

Q 16. What remedy is available if any person collects share money or any other sum by misrepresentation to the prospective members in the name of the society to be registered?

A. It will amount to an offense u/s 146 of MCS Act 1960.

Such person can be prosecuted in the court of law with provision approval of DJR of concerned Division u/s 148.

Accommodation Times Bureau
By Ar Bharat C. Shah
Development in major part of suburbs of Mumbai is redevelopment of co-operative society buildings and while society proposes to go for redevelopment there are several issues which managing committee has to deal with and one of the important decision the society has to take, what amount towards corpus be ask for from the developer?
With recent modifications in Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai the scenario has drastically changed, more so, because of introduction of Fungible F.S.I.
Case study given here under may help valuers as well as societies to arrive at a reasonable figure for corpus amount to be ask for from the developer.
Development in Mumbai is governed by the Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai, 1991 & amended from time to time.
Vide Notification No. CMS 4311/452/CR-58/2011/UD-11 dated 6th January 2012 the Urban Development Department, Government of Maharashtra has modified the said Development Control Regulations. According to the modifications, sub regulations (3) & (4) are added to Regulation 35 wherein; list of users permitted free of F.S.I. with the special permission of Commissioner, Fungible compensatory F.S.I. over & above admissible F.S.I. may be permitted. Followed by the said modifications, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai issued circular No. CHE/22276/DP/Gen dated 12.01.2012 wherein; the details of quantum of permissible fungible F.S.I. according to the user are quantified as under.
Residential user : 35%
Non residential user including commercial & industrial user : 20%
The said fungible F.S.I. over & above admissible F.S.I. shall be allowed by charging premium at the rate of 60%, 80% & 100% of Stamp Duty Ready Reckoner Rates for residential, commercial & industrial user respectively.
In case of redevelopment proposals, for rehab component no premium shall be charged for consumption of fungible F.S.I., however, it is to be distributed on prorate basis for the area of each existing tenements, fungible F.S.I. of one rehab tenement cannot be used for any other rehab tenement or for any of free sale component.
The fungible F.S.I. is interchangeable & usable as a regular F.S.I. It is not necessary that same shall be used only for flower beds, balconies, voids, elevation features etc. It can be used for these purposes and /or for enlarging the room sizes, or / and for additional rooms and / or for more dwelling units.
Case Study
Nature of property : Land with residential society building of ground plus four upper floors occupied by 10 members.
Purpose : Society to negotiate with the developer for compensation & corpus.
Date of valuation : Present.
Description of the property : The property is situated in Town Planning Scheme of Suburb of Mumbai.
According to Sanctioned Revised Development Plan for Greater Mumbai 1981-2001 extended up to 2013, property falls in Residential Zone.
According to The Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai -1991 (As amended up to 15th August 2007), permissible F.S.I. for the Zone is 1.00 & it falls in T.D.R. receivable zone.
Area of land : 1,150 sq.mts.
Total area of existing building : 1,025 sq.mts. of carpet area & 1,140 sq.mts. of built up area.
F.S.I. consumed : 0.99.
The building is more than 55 years old, therefore, society proposed to invite offers from the developers for redevelopment of the property utilizing plot potential, permissible T.D.R. & fungible F.S.I.
[A] Utilization of T.D.R. on the plot:
(a) Premium towards purchase of 33% T.D.R. to be purchased from the Government
According to Government Notification No. TPB-4308/776/CR-127/2008UD-11 dated 24th October 2011 in case of proposals in which it is proposed to utilize T.D.R. it is mandatory to purchase 33% T.D.R. from the Government at a premium to be worked out based on the Stamp Duty Ready Reckoner Rate for the open land for the particular year, which, in subject case is 2012.
Total area of T.D.R. permissible 100% of net plot area : 1,150 sq.mts.
33% to be purchased from Government (1,150 sq.mts. × 0.33) : 379.50 say 380 sq.mts.
The land rate for Village & Zone of the said proeprty is `75,500/- per sq.mt. and according to the annexure on page 5 & 6 of the Notification wherein working of premium rate for additional 0.33 F.S.I. is illustrated, for the plot premium towards 33% T.D.R. to be purchased from the Government works out as under.
Rate of developed land is `75,500/- per sq.mt. i.e. the rate is between `70,001/- to `1,00,000/- per sq.mt. & according to the annexure on page 5 & 6 of the Notification it falls in Sr. No. 9 wherein for land rate between `70,001/- to `1,00,000/- rate of premium is `20,300/- + 10% of Ready Reckoner rate exceeding `70,000/- per sq.mt.
i.e. `20,300/- + [10% of (`75,500/- less `70,000/- = `5,500/-)]
= `20,300/- + `550/- = `20,850/- per sq.mt.
Thus, premium amount towards purchase of 33% T.D.R. from Government would be:
380 sq.mts. × `20,850/- = `79,23,000/-.
(b) Cost towards purchase of balance T.D.R. from open market
Total T.D.R. permissible : 1,150.00 sq.mts.
Less 33% T.D.R. to be purchased from Government : 380.00 sq.mts.
Balance to be purchased from open market : 770.00 sq.mts.
For the locality, rate of general T.D.R. to be purchased from open market is about `2,500/- per sq.ft. / `26,910/- per sq.mt., accordingly, cost towards purchase of T.D.R. including completing the formalities for transfer in D.R.C. would be:
770 sq.mts. × `26,910/- = `2,07,20,700/-.
Add cost towards stamp duty at 3%, registration charges at 1% & other miscellaneous expenses estimated at 2% making a total of 6%, accordingly, total amount would be:
`2,07,20,700/- × 6% = `12,43,242/- & total cost towards purchase of balance T.D.R. from open market works out to: `2,07,20,700/- + `12,43,242/- = `2,19,63,942/-.
(c) Premium towards 35% fungible F.S.I. for free sale component:
According to Government Notification No. CMS 4311/452/CR-58/2011/UD-11 dated 6th January 2012 read with circular issued by M.C.G.M. bearing No. CHE/22276/DP/Gen dated 12.01.2012, it is permitted to utilize fungible F.S.I. to an extent of 35% of admissible F.S.I. for residential user by charging premium at 60% of Stamp Duty Ready Reckoner rates for developed land, which for the subject land is `75,500/- per sq.mt.
As per latest modifications to D. C. Regulations as sanctioned by Government, for residential buildings 35% additional FS.I. / Fungible F.S.I. is permissible on basic F.S.I. as well as on T.D.R., thus, total F.S.I. would be 2.70. Said fungible F.S.I. includes 10% balconies, flower beds, niches, etc Further, as per the notification balcony area cannot be claimed free of F.S.I.
Existing built up area admeasures 1,140 sq.mts. which while redevelopment will be utilized for re-housing existing occupants & in addition 35% i.e. 1,140 sq.mts. × 0.35 = 399 sq.mts. can be added by way of fungible F.S.I. making a total of 1,140 sq.mts. + 399 sq.mts. = 1,539 sq.mts. for re-housing existing occupants.
Total permissible built up area as per F.S.I. 1.00 : 1,150.00 sq.mts.
Add 100% permissible T.D.R. : 1,150.00 sq.mts.
Total permissible built up area including T.D.R. 2,300.00 sq.mts.
Less built up area for rehabilitation of existing occupants : 1,140.00 sq.mts.
Balance area towards free sale : 1,160.00 sq.mts.
Area of 35% fungible F.S.I. for free sale component
1,160 sq.mts. × 0.35 : 406.00 sq.mts.
Thus, total premium amount payable for 35% fungible F.S.I. for free sale component would be:
406 sq.mts. × `75,500/- × 0.60 = `1,83,91,800/-.
(d) Premium towards staircase / lift area to be paid to M.C.G.M:
According to Government Notification No. CMS 4311/452/CR-58/2011/UD-11 dated 6th January 2012 read with circular issued by M.C.G.M. bearing No. CHE/22276/DP/Gen dated 12.01.2012, staircase / lift area can be claimed free of F.S.I. with special written permission of Municipal Commissioner by paying premium at 25% of Stamp Duty Ready Reckoner rates for developed land, which for the subject land is `75,500/- per sq.mt.
Staircase & lift area is estimated @ 10% of 2,300 sq.mts. which works out to 230 sq.mts.
Total premium amount towards staircase / lift area:
230 sq.mts. × `75,500/- × 0.25 = Rs.43,41,250/-.
Total amount of (a) to (d) =
`79,23,000/- + `2,19,63,942/- + `1,83,91,800/- + `43,41,250/- = `5,26,19,992/- [I]
[B] Cost of construction:
Prevailing cost of construction for residential buildings in Suburbs with standard amenities and specifications is estimated at Rs.25,000/- per sq.mt. of built up area.
# Total estimated cost of construction:
Built up area : 2,300.00 sq.mts.
+ Fungible for rehab : 399.00 sq.mts.
+ Fungible for free sale : 406.00 sq.mts.
+ staircase and lift area : 230.00 sq.mts.
+ stilt area : 125.00 sq.mts. (For cost of construction considered @ 50% of proposed 1st floor.)
3,460.00 sq.mts.
Estimated cost of construction : 3,460 sq.mts. × `25,000/- = Rs.8,65,00,000/- [II]
[C] Cost towards transit accommodation to existing occupants:
Cost towards transit accommodation to existing occupants for 24 months is estimated @ `650/- per sq.mt. of carpet area per month.
1,025 sq.mts. × `650/- × 24 month = `1,59,90,000/- [III]
[D] Other expenses such as payment to be made to M.C.G.M. under various heads like scrutiny fee, development charges, premium, etc. is estimated @ `6,500/- per sq.mt.:
2,300 sq.mts. × `6,500/- = `1,49,50,000/- [IV]
[E] Other expenses / out of pocket expenses is estimated at `6,500/- per sq.mt.:
2,300 sq.mts. × `6,500/- = `1,49,50,000/- [IV]
[F] Payment towards professional fees to Architect, Structural Engineer, Registered Site Supervisor is estimated @ 10% on the cost of construction of Rs.8,65,00,000/- i.e. `86,50,000/- [VI].
Total of [I] + [II] + [III] + [IV] + [V] + [VI] = ` 5,26,19,992/-
+ ` 8,65,00,000/-
+ ` 1,59,90,000/-
+ ` 1,49,50,000/-
+ ` 1,49,50,000/-
+ ` 86,50,000/-
`19,36,59,992/-
Add interest on block up capital @ 21% per annum i.e. 42% for 24 months on `19,36,59,992/-, which works out to `8,13,37,196.64 say `8,15,00,000/-, making a total of project as :
`19,36,59,992/-
+ ` 8,15,00,000/-
`27,51,59,992/- {X}
[G] Area available to developer for sale in open market would be:
1,160 sq.mts. + (1,160 sq.mts. × 0.35 fungible) : 1,566 sq.mts.
Prevailing rate of ownership flats in newly constructed buildings in the locality is estimated at `2,25,000/- per sq.mt. of built up area, accordingly proceeds available to the developer on sale of 1,566 sq.mts.:
1,566 sq.mts. × `2,25,000/- = `35,23,50,000/-
Deduct : Cost of project as worked out above {X} = `27,51,59,992/-
` 7,71,90,008/-
Completion period for redevelopment project is estimated as two years, therefore, present value of `7,71,90,008/- is deferred for two years @ 10%, accordingly, differed value works out to:
`7,71,90,008/- × 0.82645 = `6,37,93,682.11 say `6,37,95,000/-.
Based on above, society can negotiate with the developer for the corpus.

By Accommodation Times Bureau

In a land mark judgement, Madras High Court had decided that Secretary of a co-operative society is a public servent hence corruption charges if proved, he can be booked. he learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would submit referring to three Government Orders passed by the Government of Tamil Nadu that the Inspector of Police has been conferred with the power to investigate and arrest without warrant any of the public servants as contemplated under the definition part of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is his submission that the petitioner has set up a very technical stand on the premises, that no power was conferred on the Inspector of Police either to investigate the case or to arrest an accused public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Therefore, he would submit that the plea for discharge is not at all tenable.
There is no dispute to the fact that the petitioner is a public servant as defined under section 2(c)(ix) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as he was serving as the Secretary of the Avinashi Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Avinashi. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the trial court has gone out of track and has passed an order that the petitioner is not entitled to discharge as prayed for without determining the point in issue raised by the petitioner herein. The petitioner had not challenged the sanction accorded in this case for prosecution against the petitioner. The only challenge made by the petitioner is that as per section 17(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 only the District Superintendent of Police or a police officer of equivalent rank alone is empowered to investigate the case.
The first proviso found under section 17(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 would read that, if a police officer not below the rank of Inspector of Police is authorised by the State Government to investigate the case arisen under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, he may also investigate any such offence and can also effect arrest without any warrant from the competent Judicial Magistrate concerned.
8. The question is whether the Government of Tamil Nadu has conferred any power on the Inspector of Police to investigate the cases arisen under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Let me straight away refer to G.O.Ms.No.269!Personal and Administrative Reforms (Personal N Department)! dated 04.06.1990 which empowers the Inspector of Police of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Madras under the aforesaid proviso to section 17 of the said Act to exercise the powers of investigation and arrest without warrant. But as far as the officers belonging to Groups A and B involved in any of the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are concerned, the Inspectors of Police of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Madras so empowered have been deprived of the power of arrest without a warrant.
9. Subsequently, the Government of Tamil Nadu passed G.O.Ms.No. 15, Personal and Administrative Reforms (N) Department, dated 19.02.2003 whereunder taking into consideration the jump in the pay scale of officers belonging to Groups A and B, the ceiling of the Pay structure found in the earlier G.O.Ms.No.269 dated 04.06.1990 was enhanced to Rs.11,100/-.

MADRAS HIGH COURT
Crl.R.C.No. 1099 of 2006
S. Karunakaran
vs.
The State rep. by the Inspector of Police,Vigilance and Anti Corruption Coimbatore
DATED 29.07.2009
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE.M.JEYAPAUL
Criminal Revision Case filed under section 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order made in Spl. CMP No.525 of 05 in Spl. CC No.4 of 05 dated 6.4.06 on the file of the Spl. Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore, Coimbatore District. For petitioner : M/s.R.Saseetharan
For respondent : Mr.N.Kumanan, Govt. Advocate. ORDER
The petitioner who was serving as the Secretary of the Avinashi Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Avinashi was charged with offences punishable under section 7 and 13(2) r/w. 13( 1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
2. Specifically referring to the embargo found under section 17(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the petitioner who stood charged as stated above moved a petition invoking the provision under section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying for discharge from the criminal prosecution launched by the respondent in Special CC No.4 of 2005. The trial court having referred to the sanction accorded for prosecution as against the petitioner herein without actually adverting to the ambit of section 17(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 which was the main crux of the issue dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner seeking discharge.
3. As already pointed out by this court, the petitioner was serving as the Secretary of the Avinashi Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Avinashi. No doubt he comes under the definition of public servant as per section 2(c)(ix) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in as much as he was serving as a Secretary of the Avinashi Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Avinashi.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently submit that the petitioner does not fall under the category of the officer belonging to Group A or Group B of the service of the Government of Tamilnadu. Therefore the G.O.’s referred to by the respondent police, as though the Inspector of Police has been conferred with the power to investigate and arrest without warrant for the offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 would not apply to the petitioner. He would also submit that the Inspector of police who has investigated the case in this matter has not been empowered either to investigate or to arrest without warrant. The petitioner has been serving as the Secretary of the Co-operative Society and was not in the services of the Government. Therefore, he would submit that the whole investigation embarked upon by the respondent police is tainted with illegality and as a result of which discharge as prayed for is warranted.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would submit referring to three Government Orders passed by the Government of Tamil Nadu that the Inspector of Police has been conferred with the power to investigate and arrest without warrant any of the public servants as contemplated under the definition part of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is his submission that the petitioner has set up a very technical stand on the premises, that no power was conferred on the Inspector of Police either to investigate the case or to arrest an accused public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Therefore, he would submit that the plea for discharge is not at all tenable.
6. There is no dispute to the fact that the petitioner is a public servant as defined under section 2(c)(ix) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as he was serving as the Secretary of the Avinashi Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Avinashi. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the trial court has gone out of track and has passed an order that the petitioner is not entitled to discharge as prayed for without determining the point in issue raised by the petitioner herein. The petitioner had not challenged the sanction accorded in this case for prosecution against the petitioner. The only challenge made by the petitioner is that as per section 17(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 only the District Superintendent of Police or a police officer of equivalent rank alone is empowered to investigate the case.
7. The first proviso found under section 17(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 would read that, if a police officer not below the rank of Inspector of Police is authorised by the State Government to investigate the case arisen under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, he may also investigate any such offence and can also effect arrest without any warrant from the competent Judicial Magistrate concerned.
8. The question is whether the Government of Tamil Nadu has conferred any power on the Inspector of Police to investigate the cases arisen under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Let me straight away refer to G.O.Ms.No.269!Personal and Administrative Reforms (Personal N Department)! dated 04.06.1990 which empowers the Inspector of Police of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Madras under the aforesaid proviso to section 17 of the said Act to exercise the powers of investigation and arrest without warrant. But as far as the officers belonging to Groups A and B involved in any of the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are concerned, the Inspectors of Police of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Madras so empowered have been deprived of the power of arrest without a warrant.
9. Subsequently, the Government of Tamil Nadu passed G.O.Ms.No. 15, Personal and Administrative Reforms (N) Department, dated 19.02.2003 whereunder taking into consideration the jump in the pay scale of officers belonging to Groups A and B, the ceiling of the Pay structure found in the earlier G.O.Ms.No.269 dated 04.06.1990 was enhanced to Rs.11,100/-.
10. The cumulative reading of these two Government Orders in G.O.Ms. No.269 dated 04.06.1990 and G.O.Ms.No. 15 dated 19.02.2003 would read that the inspectors of police of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Madras has been authorised by the Government of Tamil Nadu invoking the powers contemplated under the proviso to section 17 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to exercise the powers of investigation and arrest in connection with any case for that matter arisen under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 but only in a case where the arrest of officers belonging to Groups A and B, formerly in the pay scale of Rs.3,500/- and now in the pay scale of Rs.11,100/-, shall not be arrested without warrant of arrest issued by the competent Judicial Magistrate. In other words, it is only the District Superintendent of Police who has been empowered under section 17(c) of the said Act can effect arrest without warrant those officers belonging to Group A and B.
11. As general power of investigation under arrest with the specific exclusion of the power of arrest of certain category of employee of Government without warrant has been contemplated in those two G.O’s., the petitioner being a public servant cannot contend that the aforesaid G.O’s would not apply to the public servants who are not Government servants. It is held emphatically that those two G.O’s. do apply to the public servants who are not Government servants also but the Government servants working in Group A and B in the maximum pay scale of above Rs. 11,100/- shall claim exemption from the purview of the power of arrest by the inspector of police attached to the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption as referred in those two G.O’s.
12. The court finds that the respondent police in this case has got ample power as per the authorisation made by the Government of Tamil Nadu in G.O.Ms. No.269 dated 04.06.1990 and G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 19.02.2003 not only to investigate the case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as against the accused petitioner but also to arrest him without warrant.
13. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the plea for discharge on the aforesaid premises is found not sustainable and therefore the said plea stands dismissed. Though the trial court has not adverted to the actual point in issue arisen in this matter, the ultimate decision to reject the plea for discharge stands confirmed and the revision is dismissed. The observations made herein for the purpose of disposal of the plea for discharge shall not have bearing on the merit of the case.

By Accommodation Times Bureau

This is a common complaint of the flat owners that builders insist on keeping
unutilised FSI for themselves even after a society has been formed and the land
conveyed. Sometimes flat owners do not read the agreement drafted by the builder
while buying their flats. These agreements usually have clauses that the builder is
entitle to all further FSI and other development rights that may occure on the land.

“when a purchaser is buying a flat; he is not only purchasing the flat but also
acquiring an undivided right title and interest in the property.” In one of the
judgment, the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has
ruled that after the registration of a housing society any balance unutilised residual
floor space index (FSI) shall be available to the society and not to the builder. In
the said matter when the District Forum directed the builder to enjoy the unutilised
and future FSI. The housing Society aggrieved by the judgment went in appeal
before the State Commission it was held thet as per the MOFA provisions, after
registration of the society, the builder cannot claim residual FSI or further FSI in
the plot or layout. Any provision in the builders agreement for sale contrary to the
statutory provision will not be binding on any flat purchaser or the society.

The society had relied on various provisions of MOFA and in particular clause 4 of
the Model agreement which is mandatory in nature clause 4 of Model agreement
provides that the residual FSI in the plot or layout which has not been utilised will
be available to the promoter till the society is registered. After registration, the
residual FSI shall be available to the society. the State Commission upheld the
contention of the society that if the contractual provision conflicts with a statutory
provision that is mandatory in nature, it is the statutory provision that must prevail
over the contractual provision.

FSI violation by the Promoter:-

The Promoters/ Builders construct multi – storeyed building and use extra FSI
which is not in approved plan sanctioned by the BMC it is clear and flagrant
violations of the BMC Act, 1888, also violation of the D.C. Regulations. Where
the construction of the entire building is illegal, the building has to be demolished.
Where an extra floor has been put up illegally, the same should be demolished.
Necessary modifications/demolitions must be done for satisfying the norms for fire
safety and car parking facilities within the building premises. However, in some
cases the flat-purchasers are aware of the said violations.

FSI violation by the Society itself:-

The Registered Co-Operative Housing Society also sometime violate the BMC
Act. Society construct any additional structure in excess of the available FSI on the
property.

In PRATIBHA CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. -VS- STATE
OF MAHARASHTRA (1991) 3 SCC 341), the Court came down heavily on the
housing society which made construction in violation of the Floor Space Index.
The Court said that such unlawful construction was made by the Housing Board in
clear and flagrant violation and disregard of FSI and upheld the order of demolition
of all the eight floors as ordered by the Bombay Municipal Corporation. While
dismissing the special leave petition, the Court observed that -”Before parting
with the case, we would like to observe that this case should be a pointer to all the
builders that making of unauthorised constructions never pays and is against the
interest of the society at large. The rules, regulations and bye-laws are made by the
Corporations or development authorities taking in view the larger public interest of
the society and it is the bounden duty of the citizens to obey and follow such rules
which are made for their own benefits.”

The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has issued a notice against
the builder of Gaurang Apartment in Mahaveer Nagar at Kandivili for violating
floor space index (FSI) norms. The building has 12 extra floors without the BMC’s
permission.

As per the survey report most of buildings constructed have violated the FSI norms
by allegedly misusing the additional FSI. It points to corruption in the NMMC’s
administrative functioning since the concerned civic officials have been issuing
NOC to builders for construction of towers despite the builders misusing the
additional FSI.

Municipal commissioner Bhaskar Wankhede said that some of the violations of
the DC rules would be regularized as committed by the chief minister but towers
where gross violations are found will be demolished soon. Residents of the housing
societies are expected to cough up a sizeable amount for penalty and premium to
the NMMC to regularize the violations in their posh apartments. The civic body is
yet to decide on the penalty amount though.

As per the survey conducted by considering the technical aspects as the structural
plan of the buildings have been verified in order to ascertain whether the builders
have constructed them at the same place as per the architectural plan submitted to
the town planning department.

After considering the architectural plan, the concerned builders have been issued
the Occupation Certificate (OC). We have scrutinized whether the parking/open
space is misused for commercial purpose. It has also been checked whether the
builders have constructed the buildings as per the architectural plan submitted to
the town planning department upon which they have obtained the relevant and
mandatory documents.”

Consumer Action Group -vs- The State of Tamil Nadu & ors.dated 23.8.2006,
cited supra, the Supreme Court while upholding the validity of Section 113-A as
a one-time measure, has warned that before such pattern becomes cancerous and
spreads to all parts of the country, it is high time that remedial measures were
taken to check this pattern, as it retards development, jeopardises all purposeful
plans of any city and liquidates the expenditure incurred in such development
process.

Illegal construction and violation of Law:-

In DR.G.N.KHAJURIA -VS- DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (1995)
5 SCC 762), the Supreme Court observed that – “Before parting, we have an
observation to make. The same is that a feeling is gathering ground that where
unauthorised constructions are demolished on the force of the order of Courts,
the illegality is not taken care of fully inasmuch as the officer of the statutory
body who had allowed the unauthorised construction to be made or make illegal
allotments go scot-free. This should not, however, have happened for two reasons.
First, it is the illegal action/order of the officer which lies at the root of the
unlawful act of the citizen concerned, because of which the officer is more to be
blamed than the recipient of the illegal benefit. It is thus imperative, according
to us, that while undoing the mischief which would require the demolition of
the unauthorised construction, the delinquent officer has also to be punished in
accordance with law. This, however, seldom happens. Secondly, to take care of the
injustice completely, the officer who had misused his power has also to be properly
punished. Otherwise, what happens is that the officer, who made the hay when the
sun shined, retains the hay, which tempts others to do the same. This really gives
fillip to the commission of tainted acts, whereas the aim should be opposite.”

By Accommodation Times Bureau

Under Bye-law No. 162 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Housing Societies Model
Bye- laws says: No member of the society shall destroy, deface or cut down any trees
in the society’s compound. A violation may render the member concerned liable for
action.

When trees can be chopped and what are the precautions?

Trees cannot be hacked without prior permission of the Tree Officer even if the
tree is in private premises. In Mumbai, the civic chief is the chairperson of the
Tree Authority which governs all the activities implemented under the Act. Even
government bodies require permission from the Tree Authority for any developmental
purpose.

The society has to submit an application to the civic body for permission. The Society
should trim the trees regularly, During and after the monsoons, trimming the branches
is necessary as there are increased chances of accidents. A lot of cars are parked
under them, and children play in the compound in the evenings. So if a branch falls,
someone is likely to get hurt therefore it is necessary to chop the trees which are in the
society’s compound. Sometimes a tree can falls on a property due to natural causes
(rain, fire, lightening, wind)

At the time of construction of Building it must be take care by builder that trees
should be planted with keeping proper distance between wall and garden. Sometimes
builders planted trees very close to compound and therefore it creates damage to
compound wall.

The BMC and Society need to Co-operate with each other Therefore, it wants the
people to take some responsibility and help them in keeping the city safe.

What is a Procedure?

1. The society has to submit an application to the civic body for permission.

2. To take permission, citizen need to take a photograph of the society with an

application for trimming the branches. According to the rules, the permission
should be granted within 30 days.

3. If documents show that the municipal authority had failed to decide, a citizen

can demand an explanation from the respective municipal council under the
Right To Information Act, 2002.

Penalty
Every act of chopping of trees constitutes a separate offence. The penalty includes a
minimum fine of Rs 1,000 and maximum of Rs 5,000 with imprisonment.

Can Society need to take a charge?

Nearly four cases of tree collapses were reported in housing societies over last two
months, the most recent being that of a Kalina resident, who sustained grievous
injuries when a tree fell.

However, if the society doesn’t get permission within specified period then society
can go ahead with the pruning but there are some restriction on chopping the branches
of the trees which must not damage to the building and neighbour building also.

The civic body is in charge of trimming the trees on the roads and not in the housing
societies’ compounds. Therefore, people have to take responsibility and trim trees
in their society. Most societies do so every year whereas there are few that are
not willing to do so as it costs a lot. And as for permission, societies can trim tree
branches that are small; it’s only the big branches for which one needs permission
to trim. If people are angered by the BMC fining them for not trimming trees then to
some extent, they are correct.

Accommodation Times News Services

Your last chance to get conveyance. The government of Maharashtra has started schemes for Registration of non registered Co-operative Housing Societies and Deemed conveyance from 15th Dec 2012 to 30th June 2013. The schemes have specific forms and documentation to be filled in to get Deemed Conveyance.

To down Load forms and instructions : Click Here

By Accommodation Times News Services

BEFORE THE DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MUMBAI CITY (3)
COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 5A OF MAHARASHTRA OWNERSHIP FLATS (REGULATIONS
OF THE PROMOTION OF CONSTRUCTION, SALE, MANAGEMENT AND TRANSFER) ACT, 1963

Application No. 124 of 2012

APPLICANT: RoopDarshan Cooperative Housing Society Limited
Juhu Lane, Behind Costa Coffee, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400056

REPRESENTED BY: K.K. RAMANI, ADVOCATE

ORDER
(FOR DEEMED CONVEYANCE)

In exercise of the powers conferred on me under Section 11(3) of the Maharashtra Ownership

Flats (Regulations of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act,

1963, I, Subhash Patil, the Competent Authority and District Deputy Registrar of (3) Mumbai, do

hereby confirm that the Deemed Conveyance Application bearing No. 124 of 2012 filed by the

Applicant is a fit case for grant of Unilateral Deemed Conveyance and certificate for entitlement

of the Society to register the same. Accordingly, I am issuing a Certificate for grant of Unilateral

Deemed Conveyance.

I, further direct the Applicant that to prepare draft of Unilateral Deemed Conveyance and submit

the same with the Authority on the basis of the Certificate for grant of Unilateral Deemed

Conveyance and the property described therein.

Similarly, I direct the Sub-Registrar of Assurances and any other Registering Authority under the

Registration Act, 1908 after the adjudication of Unilateral Deemed Conveyance by the Collector

of Stamps on the property as described in the Certificate to register the same and to transfer the

right, title and interest of the Promoter in the property in favour of the Applicant.

This order is passed under my seal and signature on 1.2.2013.

Date : 01/02/2013

Place :Bandra, Mumbai

Sd/-
SubhashPatil
Competent Authority &
District Deputy Registrar,
Cooperative Societies,
Mumbai City (3)

LIBERAL

BEFORE THE DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MUMBAI CITY (3)
COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 5A OF MAHARASHTRA OWNERSHIP FLATS (REGULATIONS
OF THE PROMOTION OF CONSTRUCTION, SALE, MANAGEMENT AND TRANSFER) ACT, 1963

Application No. 124 of 2012

APPLICANT: RoopDarshan Cooperative Housing Society Limited
Juhu Lane, Behind Costa Coffee, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400056

REPRESENTED BY: K.K. RAMANI, ADVOCATE

CERTIFICATE
(FOR DEEMED CONVEYANCE)

In exercise of the powers conferred on me under Section 11(4) of the Maharashtra Ownership

Flats (Regulations of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act,

1963, I, Subhash Patil, the Competent Authority and District Deputy Registrar of (3) Mumbai, do

hereby certify that Deemed Conveyance Application bearing No. 124 of 2012 filed by

RoopDarshanCooperative Housing Society Limited having address at Juhu Lane, behind Costa

Coffee, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400056, a Society registered under the Maharashtra Co-

operative societies Act, 1960 read with the Rules of 1961 thereto under Sr. No. BOM/K-

WEST/HSG/TC/713/94-95 on 18.9.1984,is a fit case for Deemed Conveyance in favour of the

Applicant and registration of the Deemed Conveyance as a Unilateral Deemed Conveyance

under the Registration Act, 1908 by the Sub-Registrar of Assurances or any other authority,

land bearing Survey No. 270A, HissaNo.2(part), Survey No.207C, Survey No.207D, HissaNo.1,

Survey No.207D, HissaNo.2, Survey No.282 (part), Survey No.286, Hissa No. 1(Part), CTS No.

519C, Mouza Vile Parle, TalukaAndheri, Mumbai Suburban District, admeasuring 3207 sq.mtrs.

and the buildings known as RoopDarshan‘C’ and RoopDarshan ‘D’ and to transfer all the right,

title and interest in favour of the Applicant Society.

Place :Bandra, Mumbai

Sd/-
SubhashPatil
Competent Authority &
District Deputy Registrar,
Cooperative Societies,
Mumbai City (3)

LIBERAL

BEFORE THE DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MUMBAI CITY (3)
COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 5A OF MAHARASHTRA OWNERSHIP FLATS (REGULATIONS
OF THE PROMOTION OF CONSTRUCTION, SALE, MANAGEMENT AND TRANSFER) ACT, 1963

Application No. 126 of 2012

APPLICANT: BandraAkil Premises Cooperative Society Limited
Plot No.24, TPS III, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400050.

REPRESENTED BY: K.K. RAMANI, ADVOCATE

ORDER
(FOR DEEMED CONVEYANCE)

In exercise of the powers conferred on me under Section 11(3) of the Maharashtra Ownership

Flats (Regulations of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act,

1963, I, SubhashPatil, the Competent Authority and District Deputy Registrar of (3) Mumbai, do

hereby confirm that the Deemed Conveyance Application bearing No. 126 of 2012 filed by the

Applicant is a fit case for grant of Unilateral Deemed Conveyance and certificate for entitlement

of the Society to register the same. Accordingly, I am issuing a Certificate for grant of Unilateral

Deemed Conveyance.

I, further direct the Applicant that to prepare draft of Unilateral Deemed Conveyance and submit

the same with the Authority on the basis of the Certificate for grant of Unilateral Deemed

Conveyance and the property described therein.

Similarly, I direct the Sub-Registrar of Assurances and any other Registering Authority under the

Registration Act, 1908 after the adjudication of Unilateral Deemed Conveyance by the Collector

of Stamps on the property as described in the Certificate to register the same and to transfer the

right, title and interest of the Promoter in the property in favour of the Applicant.

This order is passed under my seal and signature on 1.2.2013.

Place :Bandra, Mumbai

Sd/-
SubhashPatil
Competent Authority &
District Deputy Registrar,
Cooperative Societies,
Mumbai City (3)

LIBERAL

BEFORE THE DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MUMBAI CITY (3)
COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 5A OF MAHARASHTRA OWNERSHIP FLATS (REGULATIONS
OF THE PROMOTION OF CONSTRUCTION, SALE, MANAGEMENT AND TRANSFER) ACT, 1963

Application No. 126 of 2012

APPLICANT: BandraAkil Premises Cooperative Society Limited
Plot No.24, TPS III, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400050.

REPRESENTED BY: K.K. RAMANI, ADVOCATE

CERTIFICATE
(FOR DEEMED CONVEYANCE)

In exercise of the powers conferred on me under Section 11(4) of the Maharashtra Ownership

Flats (Regulations of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act,

1963, I, SubhashPatil, the Competent Authority and District Deputy Registrar of (3) Mumbai, do

hereby certify that Deemed Conveyance Application bearing No. 126 of 2012 filed by

BandraAkil Premises Cooperative Society Limited having address at Plot NO.24, TPS III, 16th

Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400050, a Society registered under the Maharashtra Co-

operative Societies Act, 1960 read with the Rules of 1961 thereto under Sr. No.

BOM/GEN/1307/1971 on 10.05.1979, is a fit case for Deemed Conveyance in favour of the

Applicant and registration of the Deemed Conveyance as a Unilateral Deemed Conveyance

under the Registration Act, 1908 by the Sub-Registrar of Assurances or any other Registering

authority, land bearing Final Plot No.24, TPS III, CTS No. F/651 of Bandra, MouzaBandra,

TalukaAndheri, Mumbai Suburban District, admeasuring 476.6 sq.mtrs.and the building known

as “Akil” and to transfer all the right, title and interest in favour of the Applicant namely

BandraAkil Premises Cooperative Society Limited.

Sd/-
SubhashPatil
Competent Authority &
District Deputy Registrar,
Cooperative Societies,
Mumbai City (3)

By Accommodation Times News Services

MCS Act 1960 amended as per 97th Amendment Ordinance – 2013 has come into force w.e.f. 15.02.2013. It has become necessaty for all the co-operative housing societies to call for a Special General Body Meeting before 30.04.2013 to adopt the MODEL BYE – LAWS OF COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY AS PER 97TH CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT and MAHARASHTRA CO-OP. SOCIETIES (AMENDMENT) ORDINANCE 2013. The agenda should be as following:

1) To discuss about the MODEL BYE – LAWS OF COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY AS PER 97TH CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT and MAHARASHTRA CO-OP. SOCIETIES (AMENDMENT) ORDINANCE 2013 and adopt the same (copy of the Model Bye Laws is attached)
2) To appoint auditor
3) To appoint auditor from the penal approved by the co-operative department
4) One audito can not continue for more than 3 years and can take up auditing of more than 20 co-operative societies
5) To submit the copies of adopted Model Bye Laws to the concerned registrar’s office for approval.

All the societies whose term is over before this (15.02.0213) or is going to be completed within next six months must follow the above procedure immediately.

It is binding for all the societies to hold AGM before 30th September. There is no provision for extension.

The related Circular No. 503 dated 28.02.2013 issued by Deputy Registrar of K – West Ward

Down Load Free : Model Bye-Law : MODEL_BYE_LAWS_OF_HOUSING_CO-OPERATIVE_SOCIETIES_as_per_97th_Amendment

By Accommodation Times News Services

By J.B.PATEL – JEBY
MAHARASHTRA CHS & RTI UNION
1. 24.05.2013

FAQ ON PARKING:

1) QUESTION: CAN A MEMBER HOLD PARKING SPACE / STILT IF HE HAS PURCHASED THE SAME?

ANSWER: Builder has to provide a mandatory parking space to a certain number of flats dependant on the size of every flat as per the provisions of the Development Control Regulations. Parking space is not counted in F.S.I calculation and is the property of the society. Hence, by the same reason and also as IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 2182 OF 2007, Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd .Appellant Vs. Panchali Co-Operative Housing Society Limited., versus Panchali Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, the Builder is NOT entitled to sell you Parking Space outside the FSI consumed which was further confirmed IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2544 OF 2010, Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd. Apellant Vs. Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
2) QUESTION: WHETHER THE ALLOTMENT OF PARKING SPACES / STILTS SHALL BE MADE BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE BASIS OF ‘ FIRST COME FIRST SERVEDOR UNSOLD AND AVAILABLE PARKING SPACE?

ANSWER: Builder has no right to sell any car patking space. The reason is when a flat purchaser is purchasing a flat, he is paying certain amount for the common areas and amenities appurtenant to the primises.
The common parking area / stilts is the property of the said society as per the said High Court order and also as per the various provisions of DCR & MOFA Act. But, be advised that this common parking area does not include the parking space that is reserved for each flat as per the provisions of DCR. Hence, this common parking space is the property of the society and the society can allot it on ‘First Come First Serve” basis or in any other manner in accordance to decisions of all the members, within the frame work of the Model Bye-Laws & MCS Act, 1960.
3) QUESTION: WHO OWNS THE CHS PARKING SPACE?
ANSWER:
a) The CHS “Solely” owns the common spaces (Stilt, Open or whatever)

b) The members DO NOT own the common spaces (Stilt, Open or whatever)

c) Allotment of Parking space is a “Administrative function” and the MC as well as General Body are empowered to allot the parking space to its own Registered members

d) Registered members include family members and associate members

e) Tenant’s are Nominal Members and have no rights of a regular member, which includes having no rights of parking of parking in the CHS premises. However, at the discretion of the MC, parking can be an extended as humanitarian facility to the nominal members.
f) Parking area (Stilt, Open or whatever) is not covered under Floor Space Index (FSI) and hence is not saleable, as upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Nahalchand vs. Panchali CHS.
g) The bye-law provision pertaining to Parking “RIGHTS” is a gross violation of the
various BMC & Fire act rules and has got no force of law, in Court of Law.

4) QUESTION: CAN THE MC REFUSE TO ALLOT PARKING SPACES TO ITS MEMBERS ?

ANSWER:

a) Parking space limitation (numbers) is decided by the Lay-Out-Plan (LOP) as sanctioned by the civic body (like BMC)
b) and under the Development Control rules (DC rules)
c) and under the Fire Act rules
d) The MC is bound not to violate the LOP & DC Rules & Fire Act rules, regarding the way common spaces are to be maintained.

5) QUESTION: WHAT IS THE TYPICAL PARKING CHARGES LEVIED BY CHS?

ANSWER:

a) Parking charges may be determined amongst the GB members, directing the MC to implement the GB directions.
b) Parking “charges”are not equivalent to Parking “penalty” for violations of Parking spaces & usages.
c) Parking charges may be from 10/- to 10,000/- or anything per vehicle, per month, BUT as decided by the GB, BUT this is again applicable “ONLY” to Registered members including his family members and associate members.
d) Nominal member is not a registered member. Hence parking charges do not apply to him. Hence Parking space can be denied to Nominal members, even if parking space is allotted to registered members including his family members and associate members, since Parking space is not a right granted to the registered members.

6) QUESTION: WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTANANCE OF PARKING SPACES?

ANSWER:
a) The MC is responsible for the upkeep & safety of the Parking spaces and for the safety of the members Parked vehicles rwsonable precautions may be taken by MC.
c) The member who parks his vehicle with the permission of the MC and pays Parking charges, can file Civil Cases, Criminal Cases and Consumer Court cases, against the CHS, for any “Negligence & Deficiency” in parking facility, vehicle damages etc….
d) The MC is liable to provide Common area lights, Security services to the CHS common areas, Sweeper charges to the parking area, path-way repair & maintenance etc…

7) QUESTION: CAN PARKING DEPOSIT BE COLLECTED?
ANSWER:

a) Parking space is a Common area and Deposit for Parking space cannot be collected, even if passed by the GB.
b) MCS RULE 39 restricts rights of society to raise funds.
c) Deposit means refundable, interest free, or whatever.

QUESTION: HOW TO ALLOT PARKING SPACES?
ANSWER:

a) Depending on the number of lawful Parking spaces (under BMC rules) and number of member vehicles, Parking space may be tentatively allotted on yearly Rotation usage system, which depends on cyclic First Apply First Allotment system.

b) More than one parking space may not be allotted to a member IF other members
parking requirements are not fulfilled.

• 9) QUESTION: WHAT ABOUT PENALTY ON PARKING OFFENSES? (Open, Stilt or whatever):
ANSWER:

a) Penalty in a CHS is a “Fine” for violations of the CHS rules & conditions and Resolutions passed in the GB directing the MC to implement the GB directions applicable to them.
b) Penalty amount may be fixed and decided by the GB and but levied to a member only after after giving opportunity to the member.
c) However, by virtue of elections and the MCS Bye-Law no 136 of the old Bye-Laws and MCS Bye-Law no 138 of the new Model Bye Laws read as under “The members of the Committee shall be jointly and severally liable for making good any loss which the society may suffer on account of their negligence or omission to perform any of the duties and functions cast on them under the Act, Rules and Bye-laws of the Society.”
d) In case of dispute of Penalty amount levied by the MC, the member may approach the local Ward Deputy Registrar / Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Housing Societies, for redressal of his grievances.
As per New Model Bye Laws (as amended in 2009) Bye Law No.166: The general body meeting, after considering the say of the member and after giving him hearing, may levy penalty at the rate fixed by the meeting of the general body of the society but not more than Rs.1000.

MOFA, is very clear on a part of parking space, stilt and open to sky. Builders do not have any right to sell these spaces, as per lot of judgments. In spite of Supreme Court judgment, some of the builders are known to sell such spaces for lakhs of rupee. If anybody wants to fight, our litigation system is so lengthy, and expansive. As per D.C. Rule builders have to keep 10% (increased to 25% in some areas) parking space in every building project, reserved for the visitors.

1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 2182 OF 2007 Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd .Appellant Vs. Panchali Co-Operative Housing Society Limited. ..Respondent

2) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2544 OF 2010 Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd. Apellant Vs. Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Respondent
Note: The said High Court Order of Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd versus Panchali Co-Operative Housing Society Limited was challenged in the Supreme Court of India and the Hon’ble Supreme Court also upheld the Judgment of the Bombay High Court i.e. “Builder cannot sell parking slots in the stilt area as independent flats or garage”

IF THE BUILDER HAS ALREADY SOLD PARKING SPACE:
Under Section 78 of MOF Act, The allotment of parking space/ stilts shall be made by the Managing Committee on the basis of ‘first come first served’ for unsold and available parking spaces. In a judgment by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission authenticated the Cooperative Housing Societies that they can redistribute parking spaces sold and allotted by the Developer after adopting a suitable bye-law. The Commission ruled that the allotment of parking space is a matter that has be decided by the Housing Society. The Commission’s verdict was delivered on February 21, 2012 while deciding a complaint filed by Thane-based elderly couple. The complainants who had purchased a flat in one of the Housing Societies in Thane, had approached the Commission in May last year after they were physically restrained by employees of the Developer from parking their vehicle in a stilt parking space sold to another flat purchaser in the same Society. The complainants alleged that they were thereafter compelled to park their vehicle outside the Society compound.
The Commission ruled that Managing Committee of the Cooperative Housing Society can now decide fresh parking arrangements by cancelling the allotment of parking spaces made by their Builder by adopting a suitable bye-law. The complainants sought compensation from the Developer for selling parking spaces in breach of provisions of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963. The Developer contended that he had never agreed to sell or allot any parking space to the complainants. The Commission discarded the Developer’s contention, reiterating the settled legal position that the Developer cannot sell or allot any
parking space, which forms part of the common amenities of the Housing Society.

**************************************************************************

By Accommodation Times News Services

By Dr Sanjay Chaturvedi

Members are been charged Non-Occupancy Charges if they give their flats on Rent. With due permissions and notifying to society about the intentions, members are right fully assigns the right to live in on behalf of the members them shelves.

Society, since charging non occupancy charges, cannot deny parking to tenant of the members. It has to honor the same privileges and services as if given to its member. The member is paying for all the charges plus the Non-occupancy charges over and above the normal bills. The rule says and various Supreme Court judgment says the Non-Occupancy Charges should not exceed Ten percent of the maintenance charges.

Many societies have told members that they will not allow parking to tenants in spite of member eligible for parking either purchased by him from builder and society later ratified it or as per the parking policy of rotation or otherwise. This is illegal. The right of member to stay is honoured then why not facilities and amenities. The parking is facility attached to the flat and not the member. Hence who soever occupy the flat in a society is eligible for parking according to the society’s rule.

By Accommodation Times News Service

Q.1. When did the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act comes into existence?

Ans. The above said Act came into force in the year 14-9-1888 and it now extends to Mumbai City, Central Suburbs till Mulund & Western Suburbs till Dahisar.

Q.2. In Corporation how many Councilors are there? What is the duration of their term?

Ans. There are 221 elected councilors. 5 are nominated Councilors. Normally the terms of councilors are five years. If the Corporation is dissolved then their term ends.

Q.3. Which are the Municipal Authorities as per the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888?

Ans. As per Section 4 there are 9 authorities as per the Act (a) Corporation (b) Standing Committee (c) Improvement Committee (d) B.E.S.T. Committee (e) Education Committee (f) Ward Committee (g) a Mayor (h) a Municipal Commissioner & (i) a General Manager of B.E.S.T. Undertaking.

Q.4. Who can stand for Ward Municipal Election?

Ans. As per Section 14- A person who has completed twenty one years on the last day of making nomination and who is enrolled  in the Election roll as a voter of any ward.

Q.5. Who decides the disqualification of Municipal Commissioner?

Ans. As per Section 33 Chief Judge of the Small Causes Court is empowered to determine the disqualification of Municipal Councilor who is declared to be elected for Councilor if disputed election is also questioned on the ground of corrupt practice. If he is satisfied that a candidate has committed such practice in that even he may set aside the election of such candidate.

Q.6. Who conducts Municipal Election?

Ans. As per Section 18A the State Election Commissioner conducts the election and controls the preparation of electoral rolls. He can delegate his power to State Government Officer not below the rank of Deputy Collector or Officer of the Corporation not below the rank of the Asst.  Municipal Commissioner.

Q.7. Whether election Commissioner can requisition any premises & vehicles for the purpose of election?

Ans. Yes. Any person who is an owner or in possession of premises or vehicles, on receipt of requisition order in writing has to comply with this order. He will be paid compensation for the same as per government rules and regulations.

Q.8. What are the consequences, if the owner or occupant does not obey requisition order?

Ans. Requisition authority or any officer deputed by them can summarily evict the person from the requisitioned premises.

Q.9. What are the consequences if any person votes in Election by in personification?

Ans. If it is found that the person has voted in personification then he will be taken into custody and criminal prosecution can be initiated against such a person.

Q.10. Who can file Municipal Election petition and where? On what grounds?

Ans. Any person enrolled in the Municipal Election roll can file Municipal petition before Chief Judge of the Small Causes Court on the following grounds:

a) Disputed qualification of elected Councilor.

b) Corrupt practices.

c) Election Petition should be filed within 10 days from the date of publication of the results by Election Commissioner.

Q.11. What happens if Election of Councilor is set aside by the Court?

Ans. If the Court does not declare any other candidate as elected then it is treated as casual vacancy and State Election Commissioner may hold Election to fill casual vacancy.

Q.12 Who can be Mayor and Deputy Mayor? Can a nominated Mayor become a Mayor or Deputy Mayor?

Ans. After General Election, in the first meeting, the Mayor and Deputy Mayors are elected from amongst the 221 Councilors. The term of Mayor is two and half years. The nominated Mayor cannot become a Mayor or Deputy Mayor.

Q.13. Who is the leader of opposition?

Ans. An elected Councilor who is the leader of the opposition party having highest numerical strength of Councilors and which is recognized as such by Mayor is the leader of the Opposition.

Q.14. How many members are in the Standing Committee?  Does the Standing Committee have power to sanction expenses above Rs.20Lakhs?

Ans. The Standing Committee consists of twenty seven councilors. After General Election the corporation shall in their first meeting appoint twenty six Councilors out of their own body to be members of the Standing Committee and the Chairman of the Education Committee shall also be a member of the Standing Committee. This is the very important committee in the Corporation which has power to sanction for more than Rs. 20Lakhs.

Q.15. How many members are in the Improvement Committee?

Ans. The Improvement Committee consists of 26 Councilors. The Corporation shall in their first meeting which is to be held in April after each General Election appoint 26 Councilors as members of the Improvement Committee. One half of the members shall retire on the first day of April every year. The Corporation shall in their Ordinary meeting in the month of March every year appoint fresh members on the Improvement Committee to fill the officers of those previously appointed by them who have retired.  In this way the balance half Committee is elected and the strength of the Improvement Committee remains of 26 Councilors.

Q.16. How many members are in the Best Committee?

Ans. The Best Committee consists of 17 members and the Chairman of the Standing Committee shall be the ex-office member of the B.E.S.T. Committee.

Q.17. The Municipal Commissioner is appointed by whom?

Ans. Municipal Commissioner is appointed by the State Government for such period not exceeding three years. However Government may renew his appointment for not more than three years.

Q.18. What are the duties of Corporation?

Ans. Corporation has obligatory duties and discretionary duties. There are twenty obligatory duties like construction and maintenance of drains, drainage work. To supply water for public and private purpose. To register the births and deaths, construction of public markets and maintains schools for primary education etc.

Q.19. What are the discretionary duties of Corporation?

Ans. There are 19 discretionary duties of Corporation, like slum improvement and up gradation, maintenance of public parks, garden etc. and any measure not specially named likely to promote public safety, health, convenience or instruction. For example corporation makes all arrangements for Ganesh Visarjan and Ambedkar Jayanti.

Q.20. What is the duty of Corporation towards pauper, lunatics?

Ans. As per Section 62E of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 the Corporation has to make  payment at the rates fixed by the State for the maintenance of such lunatic, asylum, in hospital or home; Provided if the pauper, lunatic is a resident of Mumbai for a period of more than one year.

Q.21. What are the duties of Municipal Commissioner?

Ans. Municipal Commissioner has entire executive power specifically imposed or conferred upon by this Act, to prescribe the duties and exercise control supervision on all Municipal Officers except Municipal Secretary and staff working under him. He is responsible for implementing the decision of the Corporation and statutory committees.

Q.22. In case of disaster or unforeseen event who takes the urgent steps to save the life and property in Mumbai?

Ans. In case of storm, earthquake, House Collapses or accident or unforeseen event involving or likely to involve  danger or loss of human or animal life the Municipal Commissioner will take immediate action with the approval of the Mayor and in the absence of mayor Municipal Commissioner will take all necessary steps and has to report to Standing Committee of Corporation.

Q.23. Whether Corporation can ask Municipal Commissioner to produce any record or correspondence or document?

Ans. Yes, Municipal Commissioner is expected to comply with requisitions made by Corporation expeditiously. If such compliance is prejudicial to the interests of Corporation or Public, Municipal Corporation legally defer such compliance and he should declare the next meeting. However Corporation is empowered to form a committee to whom Municipal Commissioner will disclose the documents. Then Committee after examining the documents will take decision, whether the same should be disclosed or not? Committee’s decision is final.

Q.24. Who can execute contract on behalf of Corporation?

Ans. Municipal Corporation can execute contract after the prior approval of standing committee in case of contracts involving expenditure of more than Rs.20,00,000/. Contracts involving expenditure for less than Rs. 20Lakhs the Municipal Corporation can execute contract without the sanction of Standing Committee.

Q.25. Can Standing Committee amends or alters the proposal of Municipal Corporation?

Ans.  No. Standing Committee cannot amend or alter the proposal of Municipal Corporation. At the most the Standing Committee can call information or further clarification from Municipal Commissioner.

Q.26. Whether Corporation can acquire the Property?

Ans. Yes, Corporation can acquire the Property within or without the limits of Brihan Mumbai for the purpose of this Act only.

Q.27. In what manner the Corporation can acquire the immovable Property?

Ans. The Municipal Corporation can acquire the Property by agreement. However they have to obtain prior approval of the improvement committee in case the compensation to be paid exceeds Rs. 5, 00,000/-. If the compensation exceeds Rs.2, 00, 00,000/- then the Corporation’s sanction is necessary. Every contract related to acquisition of immovable property shall be executed by Municipal Commissioner and shall have the common seal of the Corporation affixed on such Agreement.

Q.28. What is the remedy if it is not possible to acquire the property by an agreement?

Ans. If it is not possible to acquire the property by an agreement then in that event Municipal Corporation can take steps to acquire the property under the Land Acquisition Act with the approval of improvement committee/corporation. On the request of Municipal Corporation the State Government will take necessary steps to acquire the required property for public purpose.

Q.29. Who can sell or dispose Municipal movable & immovable property?

Ans. Municipal Commissioner can sell the municipal moveable property worth not more than Rs. 5Lakhs at a time. The Municipal Commissioner can grant a lease/license of any immovable property for any property for less than one year at a time. The Municipal Commissioner can sell or lease Municipal property for a period before beyond one year with the approval of concerned Statutory Committee & Corporation. The decision of Corporation is final in all such matters.

Q.30. Can Municipal Commissioner Leases the municipal property at rate less than market rate?

Ans. No. Only in case of a declared slum, co-operative societies formed by officers & servants of corporation, trusts registered under Bombay Public Trust Act, exclusively for medical and educational purposes could land/property of Corporation be leased at a rate less than market value of the property.

Q.31. Whether Rent Act is applicable to municipal premises?

Ans. No. Rent Act is not applicable to Municipal premises.

Q.32. Whether Rent Act is applicable to the premises, where Municipal Corporation is the tenant of premises?

Ans. Yes. There are many such cases pending in the Small Causes Court against Corporation for eviction for breaches of tenancy agreement or non payment of rent.

Q.33. What is the procedure for enclosure of Balcony?

Ans. The Procedure for enclosure of Balcony is as under:-

An Application has to be made to the Ward Officer along with the prescribed fee, along with a copy of the plan of the Balcony. Thereafter the officer of the Bombay Municipal Corporation come and inspects the premises and grants the permission for enclosure of Balcony. The applicant can thereafter enclose the Balcony. The applicant has to pay the prescribed fees for the same. If the applicant has already enclosed the Balcony then the Ward Officer has the power to regularize the case on receipt of the application. The Ward Officer will prescribed the penalty and same will also have to be paid by the applicant.

Q.34 what is the procedure for converting a Residential Premises to a premises to be used for Commercial purpose?

Ans. As per the Circular bearing No. 4398/1462/CR-231/98/UD-11 dated 21/11/2000 issued by the Urban Development Department certain properties being utilized for residential purposes can be permitted to be utilized for commercial purposes. It needs to be emphasized that these properties should be in residential Zone with Shop line R-2 (R-2) and Commercial Zone (I-1, I-2 & I-3). It needs to be emphasized that certain conditions have to be complied with. Broadly speaking the conditions include (a) making sufficient arrangement for balcony of vehicles; (b) In R-2 Zone office/commercial use should not exceed 30% of the total built up area; (c) the permission should be normally not more than 400 sq. meters. The plan for the change of user has to be submitted through a licensed Architect to the Executive Engineer- Building Proposals Department and after the plan is approved the Applicant can convert his residential premises for commercial activities. It needs to be emphasized that the property tax as well as water charges would increase as there has been a change of user from residential to commercial.

Q.35. What is the procedure for converting a Garage, which is used for Car Parking, to be used for Commercial purpose?

Ans. Garages for Car Parking are sanctioned by B.M.C. for parking of vehicles only. It needs to be emphasized that the same are not included in FSI calculation. Therefore such conversion is not permitted by the Corporation. However, if there is extra F.S.I. or the benefits of TDR are available to the said property then such garages used for Car Parking can be regularized for commercial activities. It needs to be emphasized that many times garages are utilized by the authorities for carrying out their commercial activities. Even the Property Tax is paid at enhanced rate but then also this should not imply that member can utilize the same as a matter of right. Recovery of Property Tax is done by the Assessment Dept. whereas the plans for change of user are approved by the Building Proposals Department which has got nothing to do with the Assessment Dept. It needs to be emphasized that if the ward Office decides then they can initiate action under Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966. In fact if a prosecution is initiated under section 52/53 of the M.R.T.P. Act, 1966 then the same is a nonbailable offence. The police authorities in such circumstances can, at their discretion grant bail. There have been instances people have been put behind bars for their various acts of commission and omission.

Q.36. What is the procedure for obtaining a certified copy of the building plan?

Ans. The Applicants Architect will apply to the Ward Officer; thereafter the Ward Officer will instruct his sketches to sketch the copy of the building plan from the original copy. Thereafter the copy of the certified plan will be given to the Applicants Architect.

Q.37. What are the rates of Water Charges, when the premises are used for residential purpose? What are the rates of Water Charges if the premises are used for Commercial purpose?

Ans. The rates of Water Charges, where premises are used for residential purpose is Rs. 5/- for 10,000 Liters. The rate of Water Charges, if premises are used for Commercial Purpose is Rs. 120/- for 10,000 Ltrs. The Corporation reserves right to increase the charges at any point of time.

Q.38. What is the procedure for filing an appeal for reducing the ratable value of the property?

Ans. If the applicant is aggrieved by the ratable value as fixed by the Bombay Municipal Corporation then you should file an appeal against the ratable value as fixed by the Bombay Municipal Corporation as per Bombay Municipal Corporation Rules the appeal should be filed within the prescribed period that is from /11/2000 to /12/2000. While drafting the appeal the below mentioned points should be emphasized, if the same are applicable.

1. The Property is adjacent to slums.

2. A lot of nuisance is caused because of Beer bar, Flour Mills etc. which is near the

3. The ratable value of neighboring buildings is much less.

Q.39. Can a member covers the parking stilt?

Ans. No. Parking stilt cannot be covered. It is an open space. It needs to be emphasized that while submitting the plans certain areas are shown as open space and parking stilt is normally shown as open space. The open spaces are not included in FSI calculations.

Q.40. Can a member covers the Terrace?

Ans. No. A member cannot cover the terrace. The terrace is also shown as open space and members cannot cover the same. It is not included in FSI calculations.

Q.41. Can the builder sells the Terrace to a member and deprives the other member of the open space rights as shown in the Bombay Municipal Corporation record?

Ans. No. Pursuant to the High Court Judgment in the matter of Commercial House Block Owners Ltd. Vs. Vishaldas Shyamdas & Anr. (1981 Bombay-CR-716) this act is illegal and the builder cannot sell the Terrace to a member.

Q.42. What is the importance of Occupation Certificate as received from the Bombay Municipal Corporation?

Ans. Occupation Certificate is a very important sanction. Without this Certificate the people are not permitted to occupy the premises. If the premises are occupied without Occupation Certificate then the Municipal Corporation can prosecute the occupants under section 353case of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888.

Q.43. What is the importance of Commencement Certificate as received from the Bombay Municipal Corporation?

Ans. When the Applicant submits Application for development under section 337 or 342 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, the same is verified and if approvable IOD is issued by the Corporation. Still Commencement Certificate is received to start the work the Developer cannot start the construction activity. The Commence Certificate is issued under section 44 of Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966. If the Corporation withholds the Commencement Certificate or puts onerous condition in that event the Developer/Owner can file an Appeal before the Urban Development Minister under section 47 of the said Act.

Q.44. What is the importance of Completion Certificate as received from the Bombay Municipal Corporation?

Ans. The Completion Certificate is a very important Certificate.  That means the work is complete in all respects pursuant to conditions of I.O.D… In Bombay normally Developers do not obtain Completion Certificate. After the Occupation Certificate is obtained normally the Developers do not take steps to complete. Completion of IOD conditions which are necessary before the issue of Completion Certificate. As the water connection is granted after receipt of occupation certificate, the occupants are not affected regarding the receipt of Completion Certificate in respect of the said building.

Q.45. Can a society constructs an office in the Societies premises? Is the construction of office exempted while calculation the Floor Space Index (FSI) ?

Ans. Yes.  The society can construct an office premises in their building. However the office area between 120 sq. ft. to 240 sq. ft. is exempted from FSI depending on area of flat in the said building. When the work is seen under construction development is carried out without obtaining Commencement Certificate, notice under section 52/53 is issued by the Ward Officer calling property upon the person to remove the unauthorized work. The Ward Office may intimate the concerned Police Station to file prosecution against the person who has carried out the work without valid permission. This offence is not available.

Q.46. What is the procedure for obtaining an additional Water Line from Bombay Municipal Corporation?

Ans. If the premises do not have sufficient water supply the occupants may make Application to the Hydraulic Engineer’s Department through Licensed Plumber for additional water connection. The additional connection may not be given to the individual. It may be given to the society considering the inadequacy of water supply only.

Q.47. Is the Bombay Municipal Corporation entitled to charge Sewerage Taxes in both the bills that is Property Tax Bill and Water Charges Bill?

Ans. Yes. Normally the sewerage taxes are added in water charges bills but the same is collected by Assessment Department of Corporation.

Q.48. What should a Flat holder do if the shop keeper on the ground floor is causing nuisance?

Ans. If the shop keeper on the Ground Floor is causing nuisance it is not possible to stay in the residential flat. In that event the Complaint may be made to the Ward Officer and the Society to take steps for abetment of nuisance.

Q.49. Is the Society supposed to obtain permission from Bombay Municipal Corporation before starting major repairs? Does the society have to pay specified amount for Water Charges and the Debris Charges?

Ans. If the work are of the nature of tenantable repair then it is not necessary to obtain the permission from the Corporation but if it needs major repairs in that event it is necessary to obtain permission from Corporation and society has to pay the water charges, debris charges etc..

Q.50. Is the permission of the Bombay Municipal Corporation required for demolishing the part of a hall inside the flat?

Ans. Yes.  As per the Development Control Regulations Act, 1991 for demolishing the part of the wall inside the flat requires permission.

Q.51. Is the Permission of the Bombay Municipal Corporation required before carrying out structural changes?

Ans. Yes. It is necessary to make an Application to the Executive Engineer Building Proposals Dept. under Section 342 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888.

Q.52. What should a Flat holder do if there is leakage from the upper flat?

Ans. If there is a leakage from the upper plot the member should complain to the society and get the leakage done with the consent of the society and expenses be shared with himself and the occupant of the upper flat. If the occupant of the upper flat or the Secretary of the Society are not agreeable in that event only alternative is to complain to the Ward Officer.  On inspection by Ward staff if it is noticed that complaint is genuine the notice will be issued to the Society and its office bearers to carry out the work and comply with the notice failing which Corporation may launch prosecution against them.

By Accommodation Times Bureau

By Adv. Hemant Agarwal

By Accommodation Times News Service

PREAMBLE:

a) A Coop. Society is by default an Autonomous Body, due to the fact that Society services, duties & responsibilities are related and binding ONLY on its own members and not on others (who-so-ever). It is akin to a Local Self Government; hence Bye-Laws have to be Society Specific.

b) Each Bye-Law is unique to each Society and to its own Members, which means “uniform bye-laws” CANNOT be formulated, since even in Housing Societies, there are Societies which are Tenant Co-partnership Society and then there is Tenant-Ownership Society. The objectives of both these type of Societies are totally different, hence the self-governance provisions (means Bye-Laws) are to be made differently, BUT, compulsorily within the provisions and parameters of the MCS Act & Rules.

c) Society Bye-Laws are a set of suggestive guide-lines for the specific usage of those members, who voluntarily commit themselves to be self governed and self-regulated by it and such bye-law provisions have necessarily to be under a specific Act (e.g. MCS Act), which certainly means that such Bye-Laws have local & limited application.

d) Society Bye-Laws are Voluntary guidelines, to be self-imposed, more so since a Coop Society can make numerous Modifications / Additions / Deletions / Alterations (within the parameters u/s 13, 14, 16 r/w rule 8, 9, 12, 13 of the MCS Act). The jurisdiction of Modifications / Additions / Deletions / Alterations is with the General Body members of a Coop. Society AND CANNOT BE WITH THE COOP. REGISTRAR and/or with the Federation OR any other body, which means the Registrar cannot impose his orders on adopting any fixed Pre-Printed Model Bye-Laws that the Registrar whimsically thinks is appropriate, for EACH & EVERY Society.

WHO CAN COMPOSE A COOP. SOCIETY BYE-LAW????

a)      EACH & EVERY duly registered Coop. Society can compose / formulate their own brand new set of bye-Laws, including appendix and transfer forms, BUT ONLY after due consultation and approval of the General Body member of the society.

b) NO two bye-laws need to be similar, under any circumstances. Bye Laws are Society specific and not generalized.

c) Presently, there is no law, which mandates that pre-printed bye-laws and /or bye-laws, prescribed    by the Coop. Dept., or the District Federation, should be adopted, which again will not be tenable under the Law. Therefore a Coop. Society, need not adopt the static model bye-laws available in the open market and in a website.

d) Under the parameters u/s 13, 14, 16 r/w rule 8, 9, 12, 13 of the MCS Act, a Coop. Society is empowered with the jurisdiction of Composing totally new Bye-Laws, as per its own whims and fancies, subject to & restricted to the provisions of the Act & Rules.

e) A minimum and clear mandatory FOURTEEN days static notice is required to be given to all the Society members (under Bye-Law no. 167), with a General Body meeting agenda specific for “adopting proposed byelaws”. The presence of a minimum of 67% (2/3rd) members is mandatory at such General Body meeting, to adopt such proposed bye-laws. Such general body may delete / modify / add any number of such proposed bye-laws. After adoption of such proposed bye-laws is completed, the adopted by-laws have to be submitted to the ward Coop. Registrar, who alone has the jurisdiction to scrutinize & approve & register the Bye-Laws, subsequent to which the registered bye-laws may be implemented for voluntary self governance amongst its own members. The Registrar may direct the Society to amend a particular bye-law, ONLY IF the specific bye-law contravenes the MCS Act and Rules, and OTHERWISE the Coop. Registrar has no lawful jurisdiction to enforce his own whimsical thoughts in the bye-laws. The jurisdiction of the Registrar is restricted to directing the Society to make its own bye-law under rule 8(1), subsequent to which he has to mandatorily scrutinize the bye-laws put before him, then approve and register the byelaws, ONLY FOR THAT SPECIFIC Coop. Society.

f) Coop. Society Bye-Laws can be lawfully & unrestricting Added / Modified / Deleted, every second month, after following due procedures.  Here the Coop. Registrar has no jurisdiction to restrain or restrict the Society from repeatedly amending its Bye-Laws.

g) Coop. Society Bye-Laws can be freshly formulated by themselves or thru a legal expert. This is done after considering various aspects and needs of the specific society. A 3 floor society can have a different bye-law and a 40 floor tower building can have a different bye-law. The Coop. Registrar imposed or formulated bye-law does not have any legal force of law and can be safely junked down the sewage drain.

h) Bye-Laws are formulated for the specific purposes, AS & WHEN required by the members of the Society for their own specific requirements. These specific requirements CANNOT be known or imagined by the Coop. Registrar and hence such specific requirements may not be incorporated in the Coop. Registrar imposed or formulated bye-laws.

HERD MENALITY:

a) It is grossly evident that almost all Societies follow a standard set of Model Bye-Laws, without making any amendments (Additions / Deletions / Modifications), that too, evidently without any application of mind.

b) This static set of Model Bye-Laws, are usually the cause of mass discontent and gross disputes in a Coop. Society.

c) This static set of Model Bye-Laws, are misused by the Mg. Committee, to harass, subdue & demoralize the general society members, into staying away from active participations in the affairs of an autonomous Coop. Society.

d) Various Book-Sellers, Associations and Federations, just simply mint money, by selling hundreds of thousands of standard MODEL bye-laws, to those gullible Societies, who are always ready to be corrupted. The Co-op. Dept., in spite of being a legal guardian of the Cooperative movement, prefers to remain mute spectators to such obvious misleading and illogical activities and on the contrary grants permission to “print” such bye-laws, as is evident from the pages of the 2009 bye-laws (green cover).

CAN THE COOP. DEPT., COMPOSE ANY BYE-LAW:

a) It is not in the jurisdiction of the Coop. Dept to compose /formulate a Coop. Society Bye-Laws. They can at the most prepare a “GENERAL & SUGGESTIVE” set of “MODEL” Bye-Laws, which can be totally discarded by a Coop. Society, which means that a Coop. Society can make umpteen Modifications / Additions / Deletions / Alterations, which in turn means that a Coop. Society can compose / formulate its own bye-laws, by following due procedures.

b) The Coop. Ministry / Dept. can only compose / formulate Laws (MCS Act & Rules) THAT TOO only after the peoples representatives (Legislature)has approved and passed it. IT is neither the business nor the jurisdiction of the Coop. Ministry, to compose a Coop. Society Bye-Laws. The suggestive guidelines in the Model Bye-Law have no force of Law and cannot be considered or taken cognizance of in matters which reach the court, when such bye-laws supersede the legislative Act.

c) The Authorities jurisdiction of the Coop. Registrar (of the ward) is limited and restricted to “Scrutinize & Approve and Register” the Bye-Laws, duly submitted before him by a Coop. Society. Period…. Nothing else.

d) The Coop. Registrar is not bound to follow the Bye-Laws, when hearing disputes. However he is under mandatory duty to implement & enforce the provisions of the MCS Act & Rules, vis-à-vis the Society Bye-Laws.

e) It is lawfully unfeasible and untenable, for the Coop. Dept., to dictatorially impose a static set of Bye-Laws, by publishing the same on their website and issuing a dictatorial direction to all the autonomous Coop. Society to compel them to adopt his own formulated bye-laws, within a timeframe. This would amount to infringing on the autonomous authority of a Coop. Society, which further means stepping into the shoes of the General Body members.

f) Model Bye-Laws are not promulgated by any authority (including the state legislature) and does not have the sanction of the people’s representatives of the Legislature.

WHAT CAN BE COMPOSED IN A SOCIETY BYE-LAW????

a) All the SELF-Made & SELF-Regulatory guidelines (bye-laws) which can have a literal authority-of-law, for SELF-governance, BY the Society Members, OF the Society members and ONLY FOR the SPECIFIC Society (and not any other society).

b) The Coop. Dept., has no jurisdiction what-so-ever to direct the Societies to Add / Modify / Delete any bye-laws that is conformity of the MCS Act & Rules. The most that the ward Coop. Registrar can do is to reject OR approve & register the bye-laws put before him.

c) There is no need to formulate bye-laws pertaining to “Lift usage charges/services”, if the society building does not have lifts. BUT the gullible Societies still keep on adopting those bye-laws, which has no relevance for governance in their society.

d) A bye-law can be composed & formulated by a Statutory Body (Municipal Body, other Local self-government bodies / associations). Such bye-laws may compose finer points / details / code of conduct / penalties and so on …. BUT necessarily and mandatorily as a subordinate sub-law, necessarily based on a Law (Act) passed by the local state legislature.

e) A dispute /grievance under the self-imposed bye-law provisions can be sorted out by the Society committee (alias Grievance redressed committee / Arbitration). The courts of law, would not have the jurisdiction to uphold the provisions of such untenable bye-laws and further the courts would not have the jurisdiction to act as a Grievance redressed committee / Arbitrator.

f) Bye-Laws could be totally UNIQUE and would vary from Society to Society, since ANY provisions of the bye-laws can be Added / Modified / Deleted umpteen numbers of times, by individual Societies. Bye-Laws are a “Self Code of Conduct”, for self-governance and self-regulation (voluntary & autonomous which is implementable in nature).

g) Bye-Laws may specify specific duties and liabilities of the Mg. Committee and the Members (Meeting frequency, Penalties, Interest on Bill payments, Membership Transfer procedures & fees thereon, Sub-letting procedures and fees thereon, sub-ordinate rules & conditions, and so on)

h) Bye-Laws have necessarily to be under the provisions of a Act, and such Act is to be necessarily passed by the Legislature (meaning peoples representatives).

ORIDINANCE BASED BYE LAWS:

a) An ordinance is not a Act that is passed by the Legislature (meaning peoples representatives). An ordinance is issued under the unique & undisputable authority of the State Governor AND only the State Governor is within his territorial jurisdiction to promulgate a State Ordinance, IRRESPECTIVE of the fact that the said Ordinance does not have the mandate of the Legislature.

b) Ordinance is a Law, BUT does not have the same force as an Act, since the Ordinance does not have the mandate of the Legislature. Further in normal circumstances, the ordinance lapses by default by end of 6 weeks, until re-issued with due procedures (depending on various parameters).

c) India is a democratic country and the laws of the Country has to be formulated in a democratic manner, which means the laws of the country can be formulated only by the elected representatives of the people. IF at all an Ordinance had a Permanent force of law, THEN logically there would be no need for the legislature to compose laws AND the laws could always be created thru an ordinance, without the consent of the people.

d) The Coop. Dept., has no jurisdiction to nullify the Governors ordinance, which in turn means that no subordinate sub-laws can be created (here its means the Bye-Laws). Similarly AND IF AT ALL Bye-Laws are composed & formulated on the Governors Ordinance, THEN such Bye-Laws will also lapse with the lapse of the Ordinance (which is logically inevitable), .OR. as soon as a new Act is passed by the Legislature.

e) It would be illogical & meaningless to Adopt any bye-laws based on the Maharashtra Ordinance dated 15-02-2013 /25-04-2013, since this ordinance has to lapse, by legal default. Bye-Laws cannot be composed based on defunct Ordinances or Acts. Defunct bye-laws, would mean loss of Society members funds.

f) It would not be necessary that the exact & whole ordinance would be converted into an Act. The Legislature may decide otherwise and add / Delete / Modify or compose its own Act, with or without any or all components of the ordinance. Here, new bye-laws would have to be composed / formulated which would now be MANDATORILY based on the legislature passed-Act, which means the earlier bye-laws based on the ordinance becomes defunct by default. The whimsical & dictatorial directions for adopting such defunct bye-laws, issued by the various Coop. Registrars have no force of Law and has now become a dictatorial burden on all the Coop. Societies, which indirectly means, loss of Society members funds.

Apathy, Ignorance, Arrogance, Ego are the bane of Cooperative Society’s, which is evident from the consistent scores of litigations before the Registrar’s office and in the Coop. Courts.

By Accommodation Times News Service

Q: How to proceed if the BMC Authorities are not responding to the Complaint lodged with them?

Ans: Many times it so happens that an individual is writing various Letters to the Municipal Offices but for certain reasons replies are not forthcoming from the BMC Authorities. In such circumstances what should be the stand of an individual to get justice for his Complaint is to lodge with Sr. Municipal Corporation Officers including the Assistant Municipal Commissioner, Dy. Municipal Commissioner. The Complainant may also lodge has Complaint with the vigilance Department. If in spite of the same cases are not moved to the satisfaction of the Complainant, then in that circumstances it would be in the interest of the Complainant to lodge a Complaint with the Public Information Officer and get the necessary information from the concerned Public Information Officer under the provisions of Right to Information Act, The reasons for the same is factual position as regards progress of the matter can be easily available. Thereafter armed with the reply (if received) from the Public Information Officer the relevant information an appeal should be lodged with the Urban Development Department address of which is for the City of Mumbai is at Sachivalaya in Mantralaya Bldg., 3rd floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021. When an appeal is lodged with the Urban Development Department, a hearing will be fixed.  At the said hearing a copy of the Complaint lodged by the Complainant sent to the concerned Municipal Corporation Officer, an explanation from the same Municipal Authorities is taken into consideration. Thereafter Urban Development Department passes the Order which order shall be binding on both the parties.

The above said order is passed by the competent Authorities as per the provisions of section 53(1) of MRTP (Maharashtra Regional Town Planning) Act, 1966.Experience shows, when a Complaint is lodged with the Urban Development Department, there is a scope for individual to get justice, as the approach of the Government Officer is based on fairly, equity and natural justice.  The approx time frame for the above said matter taken by the Department is 3 months.  A simple claim for the same has to be filed.

It needs to be emphasized that the Officers employed by the Urban Development Department include Town Planners, who are having vide experience with the provisions of the BMC (Bombay Municipal Corporation) Act, as well as MRTP (Maharashtra Regional Town Planning) Act,

It needs to be emphasized that the common errors done by the Builder with regard to construction activities are as under:

(a) Converting Garages for commercial use since the garages used for car parking are

(b) Terrace Flats are sold by the Builder

(c) The Societies office space is sold by the Builder

(d) Refuge Flats are sold by the Builder

(e) Niche spaces are broken and used as a regular Flat

(f) Change of user permission is granted without complying with statutory formalities.

(g) Amalgamation of Flats is done without complying with statutory formalities.  Basically exempt from FSI bigger flat as per Table 15 of the BMC Act, stipulates number of parking space that has to be mandatory kept upon which in many cases are not complied with particularly with fire extinguisher to take a U turn.

(h) The Statutory obligation as regards open space on the ground floor is not left open

(i) Basements are converted into shopping space.

(j) Permission for temporary weather sheds on the terrace under the guise of leakage are misused.

Q: How are the open stilt area and garages converted into shops?

Ans: First and foremost condition that requires to be ensured is that there should be balance FSI with the Society / Builder. Presuming that balance FSI is having, and then also statutory compliance with regard to open space requirement has to be adhered to.  It will not be out of place to mention that if the space in the Society should be sufficient to ensure that there is no deficit place for open car parking space as has been stipulated in Table 15 of the BMC Act, Inhabitable residence where it is used for residential or office should be at least 2 feet above ground level.  In the event compliance of 2 feet height above ground level is adhered to then there is a possibility that sufficient height will not be available for the shops to carry out day to day activities.  This has been stipulated in section ______ of the BMC Act, The minimum height of 9 feet is stipulated for passing premises as a shop.

One of the reasons for insisting for 2 feet height above the normal level is to ensure that rain water does not come into the premises.  There are instances where heights of the road have been increased by one foot as and when roads are made.  In the earlier year’s height of the basement are used to be up to 11 to 12 feet.  However with the passage of time in many places the height of the Flat has been decreased.  In the event 2 feet height is increased on the ground floor then subsequently for the specific purpose of compliance with section _______, there is a possibility that the condition as regards 9 feet cannot be complied with by the Flat owners/occupant.  Misuse of temporary weather sheds.  The provisions with regards to affixing temporary weather sheds are mentioned in section _____ of the BMC Act,   The above said section is reproduced hereunder:

Table 19 stipulates the height that has to be complied with for converting a parking space into a habitable room.

Q: What should a Member of a Co-operative Society do if the office bearers of the Society are restraining the Member from parking his car inside the Society premises? Would parking of vehicles inside the Society premises amount to an essential service?

Ans: As per provisions of D.C. Rules, the Builder needs to make provision for car parking space in respect of dwelling units of the Building and as such, if the car parking space is open space, the Society is liable to demarcate parking place and allot it to the Members on pro-rata basis. Parking of vehicles inside the Society premises does not amount to essential service.

Q: There has been some unauthorized construction done in the building. What is the best way to regularize the same?

Ans: It needs to be emphasized that if the premises are Society then the best alternative for the Society and/or its Members is to purchase of TDR. If the Society and builder consent for regularizing, then revised plan should be submitted to BMC. By this way occupant will have mental peace and can find a lasting solution to the problems of unauthorized construction.

Q: The Flat has been sold by the Builder in the year 2001. By what time he is supposed to form a Society? Within how much time can action be initiated against the Builder for not forming of Cooperative Society, as well as for not giving Statement of Accounts?

Ans: The Circular issued by the Co-operative Societies, dated _____ stipulates that as soon as 60% of the flat purchasers have purchased the Flat it become the obligation of the Builder to form a Co-operative Society. In the event the Builder does not form a Society immediately as soon as 60% of the flat purchasers have purchased the Flat then the Builder would be liable for his various acts of omission and commission. The term “Deficiency of Service” would include negligence as regards formation of Society. As far as the time limit within which flat purchasers can take action against the Builder the same would be normally two years from the date of cause of action but when a Builder is supposed to perform the statutory obligations like formation of the Society or obtaining the Occupation Certificate or giving a conveyance in favor of the Society these being the statutory  obligations the cause continues resulting from the time and hence the limitation will not _______ continuing cause of action as there is no time limit for statutory obligations.

Q: Is it advisable for the Society and its members to file case in Consumer Courts?

Ans: It is an admitted fact that the procedure in Consumer Courts is for speedy disposal of cases. Depending on the type of matters the Society and its members should decide as to where a suit has to be filed. If the suit pertains to matters like transfer charges, repairs, inflated billings then definitely it is in the interest of the parties to approach the Consumer Courts. This will result not only in justice to the Complainant, but will also ensure more sense of responsibility on the opposite party.

Q: If a Builder has not formed a Co-operative Society can action is initiated against the Builder under the Consumer Protection Act?

Ans: Yes, Builder would be liable for action under the Consumer Protection Act, for not forming a Co-operative Society as he has collected money for the same.

Q: Please give some landmark Court Judgments pertaining to Co-operative Society related matters?

Ans: The landmark judgments pertaining to Co-operative Society matters are as under:

(a)  Prerna Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. V/s. M/s. Sharma Properties Pvt. Ltd. This is

(b) Torana Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. V/s. Shri Hiraji Dinanath Jamsandekar. The regards to Occupation Certificate. Same is with regards to criminal action against the Builder for not taking steps to form the Society and to solve the grievances of the flat purchaser. This sentence has been awarded by the Metropolitan Magistrate Courts. In fact in this judgment the Ltd. Metropolitan Magistrate has made specific remarks that this judgment should act as an eye-opener for persons who are having intentions of similar kind. In this case Builder of the age more than 70 years was awarded six months imprisonment.

(c) Lata Construction Co. & Ors. V/s. Dr. Rameshchandra Ramniklal Shah & Ors. In this case the jurisdiction of the Co-operative Societies to take up issues with regards to conveyance related matters has been confirmed by the Consumer Courts. The same is a continuous cause of action.

(d) Jurisdiction of Corporate Court in the case of Tiruvendrum V/s. ________________, Tamil Nadu.  It has been held that Co-operative Societies are covered under the Consumer Protection Act.

Q: What should a Member of a Co-operative Society do if the office bearers of the Society are restraining the Member from parking his car inside the Society premises? Would parking of vehicles inside the Society premises amount to an essential service?

Ans: As per provisions of D.C. Rules, the Builder needs to make provision for car parking space in respect of dwelling units of the Building and as such, if the car parking space is open space, the Society is liable to demarcate parking place and allot it to the Members on pro-rata basis. Parking of vehicles inside the Society premises does not amount to essential service.

Q: There has been some unauthorized construction done in the building. What is the best way to regularize the same?

Ans: It needs to be emphasized that if the premises are Society then the best alternative for the Society and/or its Members is to purchase of TDR. If the Society and builder consent for regularizing, then revised plan should be submitted to BMC. By this way occupant will have mental peace and can find a lasting solution to the problems of unauthorized construction.

Q: If a Builder has not formed a Co-operative Society can action is initiated against the Builder under the Consumer Protection Act?

Ans: Yes, Builder would be liable for action under the Consumer Protection Act, for not forming a Co-operative Society as he has collected money for the same.

Q: The Co-operative Society has availed the services of a Contractor. The work done by the Contractor is of substandard quality. Can the Co-operative Society insist for interim application for depositing amounts in Consumer Courts?

Ans: Any party while filing a suit in Consumer Courts can make an application for depositing certain amounts at the interim stage itself. It is at the discretion of the Court to admit the interim application or not. This would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case.

Q: Can employees of a Co-operative Housing Society be made parties in Consumer Courts?

Ans: Employees of a Co-operative Society or of any other employer are not liable for the acts as the relation between them is of a principle and an agent. The definition of Consumer as on section is as under: “If one pursues the above said definition it is crystal clear that services provided by the  Co-operative Society, if one pursues the above said definition it is crystal clear that service of personal contract is not included. Therefore, employees of a Co-operative Society would not be answerable. But Office bearers of a Co-operative Society, Managing Committee members of a Society as well as professionals like Chartered Accounts, Architects would be liable for action under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.”

Q: Can the Office bearers of a Society be made parties in Consumer Court cases for not providing services?

Ans : Co-operative Society is bound to provide services to its members. In the event the services are not provided by the Co-operative Societies then definitely the Managing Committee members can be made parties and would be liable.

Q: What is the limitation applicable to Co-operative Societies under the Consumer Protection Act?

Ans : Sec. 24 of the Consumer Protection Act, specifies the period of limitation. The same is two years from the cause of action. So from the date of formation of Society, the limitation would be for a period of two years.

Q: If a Society’s Managing Committee is misusing its power can suit be filed against the Society only or against all the members of the Managing Committee?

Ans : No doubt Society is a party to the suit, but in the interest of justice the member of the Society is well within its rights to make the Managing Committee members also as party to the suit. The approach of the Courts in such matters is to allow the Complainant to make the Managing Committee members as parties.  It will not be out of place to mention that the bye-laws cast a responsibility on the Managing Committee members that they are jointly and severally liable for their various acts of omission and commission.

Q: If a Co-operative Society is not formed then can individual members approach the Consumer Court or they should form an Association and approach the Courts? Should the limit be taken on an individual basis or the limit would be taken as on a collective basis?

Ans : If all the members are filing a representative suit then the aggregate limit would depend on the value of the claim for all the members.  It is definitely in the interest of the flat purchasers to take action against the Builder by filing suits in the Consumer Courts.

Q: Please explain the Stamp Duty implications in case of Tripartite Agreements where the first party that is the investor has not paid the Stamp Duty. The Builder acts as a Confirming Party and the Agreement are executed between Investor, Builder and the new flat purchaser. Who would be liable to pay the Stamp Duty?

Ans : Basically, the Builders take an Indemnity Bond from the flat purchasers that in the event some Stamp Duty liability occurs at any point of time, even for the transaction executed by the Builder with the investor then the flat purchaser would be liable. However, as far as Co-operative Society is concerned, they can definitely take up the issue against the Builder in Consumer Courts as it is a case of negligence of the Builders.

Q: What tactics should be adopted against the Erring Builders who are harassing the Societies? Can one approach Consumer Courts?

Ans :If the Builder is harassing the Co-operative Society by not giving Statement of Accounts, not executing the Conveyance, not forming the Society, not getting the Occupation Certificate then in such circumstances the Co-operative Society and/or the flat purchasers are well within their rights to approach the Consumer Courts.

Q: What is the remedy against Managing Committee members for wrongful acts by the Managing Committee members of harassing the members of the Society?

Ans: The members of the Managing Committee are jointly and severally liable for their various acts of omission and commission. If they harass the members of the Society then the harassed member has a right to approach the Consumer Courts not only against the Society but also against the Managing Committee members of the Society.

Q: There are dues on the Flat. The said Flat is attached by DRAT. What steps should be taken by the Society to recover their dues?  Where the suit should be filed, before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies or in Co-operative Court?

Ans : If the Flat is attached by DRAT authorities, then it would be in the interest of the Society to approach the DRAT authorities with documentary evidence like Society’s Bill for getting its arrears recovered.  The implication of the same is as and when the Flat is put for Auction Sale, the DRAT authorities make this fact known to the bidders and the property is sold with the earmarking of the amount for Society’s dues. The auction buyer has to clear first the Society dues and get his right noted through approval of Society on the flat so purchased. Society is the Owner of the property and the member only gets the limited right to occupy the Flat.

Q: THE SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 stipulates that the purchaser gets title to the property irrespective of the claim of the other claimants. Whereas as far as Society dues are concerned the stand of a Co-operative Society is that the Co-operative Society is the owner of the property and the member only gets a right to occupy the Flat.  What is the correct position?

Ans: If one observes that whenever auctions are held, the same would be on “as is where is” basis.  The dues of the Society have commenced prior to bank issuing notice for its intention to evoke provisions of THE SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 and to take possession and sale. The implication of the same is that the Society is the owner of the property and the member is getting right to occupy the property on the basis of the share certificate issued by the Society.  Therefore, the Society will have the first charge of its claim rather than the claim of the bank/ financial institutions.  The right of the purchaser would depend on the terms and conditions of the auction which normally is on “as is where is” basis.  Of course, the other Claimants may not get their right on the assets, but the Society has certainly the right to recover arrears from the buyer.

By Accommodation Times News Service

Nomination means an act of nominating. To nominate means to appoint a person who will look after the property of the person after his death. E.g: LIC/GIC,BANK etc.

A) WHAT IS PROCEDURE FOR NOMINATION?

A member can file nomination in -

• Form no. 15A In case of a single Nominee.

• Form no. 15B more nominee-Were percentage of each nominee is required to be mentioned.

The Form is to be filed and signed by the party in presence of two witnesses. And 3 copies are to be filed, One as Acknowledge receipt, Second to be received by the party after necessary entry is recorded in the society’s record and the original to be kept in society office.(entered within 7 days from meeting of managing committee).

B) WHAT IS THE FEES FOR RECORDING THE NOMINATION?

There is no charge for recording the nomination for the first time. However if the earlier nomination is revoked and new nomination is given to the society for each subsequent nomination Rs.5/- will be charged by the society.

C) WHEN SOCIETY TRANSFER PROPERTY IN NAME OF NOMINEE?

After death of person society can transfer property in name of nominee. Nominee will write to society along with copy of death-certificate and various forms (application, undertaking 500 sq. ft.), used for residence.

(i) Single nominee

(ii) More than one nominee (nominees will decide who will represent society).

Now after new model Bye-law, also allow Joint Ownership in society which was not permitted earlier. Earlier 1^st person was treated as member and other were as associate members.

D) If the nomination firm is not filed then

for transfer purposes society may insist for probate /succession certificate which involve lot of time & expenses.

i)  once application is made society can invite objection in one month (notice board  of society public notice in two newspapers ).expenses to be born by legal heirs.

ii) Indemnity bond for future claim if any.

iii) more than one legal heir then who will be 1

E) If nominee is not able to find share certificate then can apply to society for duplicate

Nominee takes these steps

a) first file application to society,

b) second give advertise in two newspapers,

c) Indemnity Bond then duplicate certificate can be issued and original will be treated as cancelled like railway ticket –if duplicate is issued –original is of no use.

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WILL & NOMINATION?

A nomination is not a will.

When there is a nomination already filed with the Society, the normal impression is that the Nominee on the death of the Member, automatically becomes a member by filing an application .However, The Supreme Court of India has ruled in 1984 that “a Nominee is a mere Trustee with whom society can initially deal with after the death of a member. All the legal heirs of the deceased Member have a right of succession to the property of the deceased member and a Nominee cannot exclude the other legal heirs”.

Thus the nominee merely acts as the trustee. In some instances, the nominee and the beneficiary of the will is the same person. At all times, the provisions of the will prevail over the nomination. It is advisable to have the same person as the nominee and the beneficiary of the will, so as to prevent future disputes. A nomination, in order to be effective, need not be executed as a will but must be in accordance with the formalities required by the particular provision applicable.

WHETHER WILL ALSO TO BE EXECUTED WHEN NOMINATION IS GIVEN TO THE Society

Any transfer of interest of the deceased member in the Co-operative housing Society is governed by the section 30 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Section 30(1)” On the death of a member of a society, the society shall transfer the share or interest of the deceased member to a person or persons nominated in accordance with the rules or, If no has been nominated, to such person as may appear to the committee to be the heir or legal representative of the deceased member.

Provided that, such nominee, heir o legal representative, as the case may be, is duly admitted as a member of the society:

Provide further that nothing in this sub –section or in section 22, shall prevent a minor or person of unsound mind from acquiring by inheritance or otherwise, any share or interest of a deceased member in a society”

From interpretation of the above section we understand the following thing.

It is very clear on the plain reading of the section that the intention of the section is  to provide for who has to deal with the society on the death of the member and not to create a new rule of secession .The purpose of the society has to deal and create interest in the nominee to the exclusion of those who n law will be entitled to the estate.

The purpose is to avoid confusion in case there are dispute between the heir and legal representative and to obviate the necessary of obtaining legal representation and to avoid uncertainties as to with whom the society should deal to get proper discharge.

Society has no power, except provisionally and for a limited purpose to determine the disputes about who is the heir, or legal representatives. It, therefore, follows that the provisions for transferring a share and interest to a nominee or to the heir or legal representative as will be decided by the society is only meant to provide for interregnum between the death and the full administration of the estate and not for the purpose of conferring any permanent right of such person to a property forming part of the estate of the deceased. The idea of having this section is to provide for a proper discharge to the society without involving the society into unnecessary litigation which may take place as a result of dispute between the heirs.

Even when a person is nominated or even when a person is recognized as a heir or a legal representative of the deceased member, the rights of the persons who are entitled to the estate or the interest of the deceased member by virtue of law governing succession are not lost and the nominee or the heir or legal representative recognized by the society, as the case may be, holds the share and interest of the deceased for the disposal of the same in accordance with the law. It is only as between the society and the nominee or heir or legal representative that the relationship of the society and its member is created and this relationship continues and subsist only till the estate is administered either by the person entitled to administer the same or by the court or the rights of the heirs or persons entitled to the estate are decided in a court of law.

Thereafter the society will be bound to follow such decision.(Gopal Vishnu Ghatnekar Vs. Madhukar Vishnu gatnekar).

The provisions of section 30 for transferring a share and interest into a nominee.

The heir or legal representative as will be decided by the society, is meant to provide for interregnum between the death and the full administration of the estate, and no for the purpose of conferring any permanent right on such a person to a property discharge to the society without involving the society into unnecessary litigation which may take place as a result of dispute between the heirs, or uncertainty as to who are the legal heirs or representatives. Even when a person is nominated, or a person is recognized as a heir or a legal representative of deceased member right of the person who are entitled to the estate of the interest of the deceased member by virtue of law governing succession are not lost, and the nominee or the heir or the legal representative recognized by the society, as the case may be, holds the share and interest of deceased for disposal of the same in accordance with law. (Gopal Vishnu Ghatnekar Vs. Madhukar Vishnu gatnekar).

By Accommodation Times News Service

The procedures for the Registrar to bring defect, disclosed in inquiry or inspection to notice of the society is as follows:

1. In case, the result of any inquiry held under Section 83 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Society Act or an inspection made under Section 84 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Society Act, discloses any defect in the constitution, working or financial condition or the books of society, the Registrar may bring such defect to the notice of the society.
2. The cooperative housing society concerned may, within sixty days from the date of any order, as may be made by the Registrar, under the foregoing subsection, appeal against it to the state government.
3. The state government may, in deciding the appeal, annul, reverse, modify or confirm the order of the Registrar.
4. If a cooperative housing society fails to rectify the defects disclosed in the course of or as a result of an audit, under Section 81 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act or fails to rectify the defects, as directed by the Registrar and where, no appeal has been made to the state government, within the time specified in order or whereon the appeal, so made to the state government has not been annulled, reversed or modified the order, the Registrar may himself, take steps to have the defects rectified and may recover the cost from the officer or officers of the society, who, in his opinion, has or have failed to rectify the defects.

By Accommodation Times News Service

In general anticipation of at least a consolation relief, scores of Society members and related activists have been consistently yearning for the Coop. Societies to come within the ambit of the Right to Information Act.

CONTRARY to the increasing yearning!!!! :

01. Direct application of “Right to Information Act”, CAN-NEVER-EVER is applicable to Non-Aided Coop. Societies of any kind (including Housing Societies). Coop. Society is a group of members, means OF the members, BY the members, FOR the members, ONLY.

REASON: The office-bearer of a Non-Aided Coop. Society “CANNOT” be classified as a “Public Information Officer” (u/s 2(l)), simply because they are not within the pay ambit defined for “Public Information Officer”, which further means that a “Public Information Officer”, must mandatorily be a Public servant or a Govt. Servant (refer section 20(2), who must be drawing Salary from the Public coffers, which in any case cannot be stated /defined for a office-bearer of a Coop. Society.

02. Applicability of “Right to Information Act”, to the Cooperative Society’s is wishful thinking (flying Horses). However, selective information from a Cooperative Society can be obtained by making an RTI Application u/s 2(f) to the competent Public / Govt. Servant (example: to the Deputy / Assistant Registrar of Cooperatives), since he alone is bound by law (as a State PIO) to obtain relevant documents from the coop. Society AND THEN provide it to the RTI applicant. Quote u/s 2(f): […. Information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force]

a) NOTE: Such procurable information under RTI, would only be in the nature of documents relating to the Society Registration & Membership details, the Audited Balance-Sheet, the registered Bye-Laws, the minute books of the Managing Committee meetings, the minute books of the

General Body meetings and so on …. BUT to the exclusion of any further documents concerning the Society’s business.

b) NOTE: U/s 32 of the MCS Act, 1960, “restrictions” are already in place for providing information about its own members to other members in the same Society, leave aside providing information to non-members (means the Public). The provisions of the RTI Act, would not be able to supersede the established “autonomous provisions” of the MCS Act, and on the contrary would be contrary to the established provisions of the MCS Act. c) For obtaining any & all (information) copies of the various records & registers of the Society, other legal options have to be adopted.

03. Scores of Coop. Society members and related activists are being mislead by some self-glorifiers, that the office-bearer of a Coop. Society, has become

a “Public authority” u/s 2(h), just simply because now the Coop. Society has become a “self government established /constituted under the Constitution (97th Amendment) and/or under the State Legislature”, WHEREAS to the contrary, a “Public Authority” can only be a person who is a Public / Govt. servant, which is mandatory. In the case of a Coop. Society, its office-bearers CAN NEVER is classified as a Public / Govt. servant.

NOTE: The Gujarat High Court has declared on 22-04-2013, that “Articles 243ZH to 243ZT” of the 97th Constitutional amendment are “ultra virus”.

These articles were SPECIFICALLY & SPECIALLY related to the Coop. Society’s. The MCS (Amendment) Ordinance, 2013, of 15-02-2013 is based on Constitution [97th amendment] Act, 2011, making it as in fructuous.

04. A non-aided Coop. Society is not liable to answer ANYBODY (to the exclusion of its own members), for the profit / loss earned OR on the admission /rejections of memberships OR making expenses for the Society OR any other business (under MCS Act) of the Society.. The decision of an autonomous Coop. Society is challengeable selectively /alternatively before the Coop. Registrar and/or before the Coop. Court.

05. WHO IS A “Public Authority u/s 2(h)” of the RTI Act?

a) A Public Authority is mandatorily a Public servant or a Govt. Servant (u/s 20(2) and should necessarily be drawing Salary from the Public coffers.

b) The senior most officer of the relevant Public /Govt. dept., appoints a competent officer for the “additional” post of “Public Information Officer (PIO)” (u/s 2(l), for the purposes of RTI Act, who is classified as a “State PIO”, meaning he works for the particular State of India.

c) The PIO (u/s 2(l), is mandatorily a Public /Govt. Servant, mandatorily drawing his salary from the Public coffers along with the relevant pay benefits, holidays, retirement benefits and so on….

d) A PIO cannot be honorary or a voluntary Public /Govt. servant, simply because there is no such provision under the present laws, for a “Public /Govt. servant” to work without Salary & other retirement benefits.

e) The RTI-PIO, mandatorily being a “Public /Govt. servant” and drawing Salary from the “Public Coffers” CANNOT hold any “office of profit”, which in turn means that he cannot conduct any Business or join any other private job, till he remains a Public servant or a Govt. Servant.

f) Presently no Public servant or Govt. servant is designated as a stand-alone Public-Information-Officer. A PIO is logically a person holding an additional post apart from his usual post. By example a PSU bank manager, is a PIO for his branch, which means the bank manager is a Bank-Manager cum PIO. The Appellate authority, mandatorily has to be next in rank (u/s 19(1)), and in a PSU bank it is generally the Deputy General Manager who holds multiple positions viz…. Deputy General Manager cum (&) Appellate Authority (RTI). Here the “Public Authority u/s 2(h), too would be the Deputy General Manager cum Appellate Authority (RTI)

g) Information under RTI can be sought from Public / Govt. Dept., for any periods, even for the previous 30 years. Records have to be mandatorily maintained, preserved and/or reconstructed by the departments PIO. The PIO is liable to provide correct information on time and in the format it is sought for. Refusal /Failure of which, the PIO can be subject to “departmental disciplinary action” u/s 20(2) & imposition of “penalty up to 25,000/-“u/s 20(1).

h) NOTE: Disciplinary action against the PIO, is possible under the “Service Rules” applicable to the PIO as provided for u/s 20(2), which reinforces the fact that the PIO has “mandatorily” to be “Public / Govt. servant” and the “Code of Conduct of services rules”, is applicable to the State PIO.

i) The PIO is liable under The “Public Records Act, 1993″, to maintain, preserve and/or reconstruct the missing / mutilated public documents.

06. WHY a Coop Society CANNOT appoint an RTI-PIO:

a) The office-bearers of a Coop. Society cannot be defined as a “Public /Govt. servant”, hence do not derive authority to appoint a “Public Authority u/s 2(h) .OR. A PIO u/s 2(l)”. ONLY & ONLY a “Public / Govt. servant”, derives the lawful authority to appoint a “Public Authority u/s 2(h) or a PIO u/s 2(l)”.

b) The office-bearers of a Coop. Society cannot draw Salary from the Public coffers along with the relevant pay & retirement benefits and so on…., simply because they are not classified as a “Public /Govt. servant”.

c) The office-bearers of a Coop. Society have to mandatorily work as “Honorary Workers”, (means without Salary) simply because under the provisions of the MCS Act, Rules & Bye-Laws, there is simply no provision for payment of Salary, pay benefits, holidays, retirement benefits and so on…. In exceptional events & subject to various parameters & subject to “income over expenditure”, a token “Honorarium fees”, MAY be given to the office-bearers of a Coop. Society. Honorarium Fees are not defined as Salaries.

d) “Code of Conduct of services rules”, DO NOT apply to the office-bearers of a Coop. Society, simply because they CAN hold any “office of profit”, which in turn means that they CAN conduct any Business or join any other private job, since they are not a Public / Govt. Servant. Hence nobody can be appointed as a PIO of a Coop. Society, which means that RTI Act cannot be made applicable to a Coop. Society.

e) IF AT ALL, a Coop. Society were to appoint an PIO, THEN it would have to be from the “duly constituted” Mg. Committee itself AND NOT from the members of the General Body, due to authorities hurdles and due to the fact that only the Secretary is liable for safe-keeping and assessing the Society records. IF a Society Secretary is made the PIO (u/s 2(l), THEN the Appellate Authority (u/s 2(h) would be the Society Chairman, which by default would mean & result in gross failure of the RTI movement in a Coop. Society, given the evidently consistent gross  Apathy, Ignorance, Arrogance, Ego being cultivated in Coop. Societies.

f) Under the various parameters prescribed under the provisions of the MCS Act, Rules & Bye-Laws, a Coop. Society is bound to preserve its records for a maximum of 10 years, to the exclusion of the Society Registration documents, the Share Certificate Books, the various registers pertaining to its members, the various minute books pertaining to Mg. Committee and General Body meetings, which are to be preserved life-long, in its original state.

g) The Officer-Bearers of a Coop. Society has no authority to reconstruct any Society records & registers, without the express approval of Society General Body and the Final directions of the Coop. Registrar, failure of which it will be termed as “Fraud & Forgery”. The “Public Records Act, 1993” will not be applicable to Coop. Society’s. The member’s records & registers of a Coop. Society are held in a Fiduciary-in-Confidence u/s 8(1 )(e), the information-disclosure of the same would not warrant any larger public interest.

h) The Officer-Bearers of a Coop. Society, not being a Public / Govt. servant, cannot be penalized up to 25000/- u/s 20(1), for Refusal /Failure to provide Information and neither can be subject to “departmental disciplinary action” u/s 20(2). IF the PIO is a office-bearer of a Coop. society, THEN the penalty up to 25000/- (u/s 20(1)), cannot be recovered, simply because the office-bearer of a coop society work on honorary basis and further the said penalty amount cannot be recovered from the Coop. Society Coffers (i.e. members funds), THUS “jinxing” the provisions u/s 20(1) & 20(2) of the RTI Act.

i) On an average the gross yearly salary for a “Public /Govt. servant” is approx. 300,000/- per annum, specifically for a person who could be competent enough to be designated as a PIO (RTI) cum regular post. Similarly for an Appellate Authority (RTI) cum regular post, the average gross yearly salary for a “Public /Govt. servant” is approx. 500,000/- per annum, for a person who could be competent enough to be designated as a Appellate Authority (RTI) cum regular post.

NOTE: A Coop. Society does not have any “Public Coffer” to afford around Te Lakhs annually, to pay such PIO & Appellate Authority, and leave aside the decade-old pending expenses of repairing & painting the society buildings. This being further so when the Coop. Society maybe a small Society with only 20 members, wherein logically the Society cannot annually spend around Ten Lakhs to pay as Salary to the PIO and the Appellate Authority

.07. BUMPER INTROSPECTION:

a) IT would be infructuous to imagine that the Govt. would designate a PIO for each Coop. Society, especially so when the Govt. wants the Coop. Society to function on Autonomous mode, without the interference of the Govt. & other persons with vested interests.

b) IT would be a further gross misconception to imagine that the Govt. would pay the salaries of the PIO’s that would be required to be designated for each Coop. Society.

08. INSTANT INFALLIBLE SOLUTION:

a) Depending on the State Governments inclination towards upholding the Cooperative Movement, AND under the powers vested u/s 157 & 158 of the MCS Act, the State Govt. may depute a dedicated “visiting PIO”, from the Coop. Dept., to each Coop. Society, on “fee-recoverable basis” from the coop. society, who would authoritively access the Society records & registers (u/s 80(3), 81, 83, 84, 89A) & provide all the relevant information to the RTI Applicant.

b) The next-in-rank, means the “Appellate Authority” under RTI Act, would obviously be the Deputy Registrar of the ward, who would obviously be forced to sit-up from his apathy-chair, to uphold the Coop. Movement, using his Suo-Moto powers /authority, to rectify the defect shown by his own departments PIO.

c) This OBIVOUSY would instantly truncate out ALL the consistent gross Apathy, Ignorance, Arrogance, Ego being cultivated in Coop. Societies, besides disciplining the over-all needs & discontent of the Society members.

d) This could also alleviate unemployment, which is over 40% of the gross population of any State. The educated unemployed would be more than happy and the Registrar could delegate his authority to a “authorized officer” who would be appointed as the PIO (under delegated authority), who’s fees would be recoverable from the Coop. Society, since the so appointed “Authorized Officer cum PIO” would be covered as a Public Servant u/s 21 of the Indian Penal Code.

QUOTE: “It requires a very unusual mind to undertake the analysis of the obvious”