By I C Naik
J D Patil, Deputy Registrar (DR) of K-East ward is once again in the news. On October 30 we had a news of wrongful dismissal of three Associate members of Committee of Estate Premises Cooperative Housing Society in Western Sub-urban district of Mumbai. See more on: https://www.indiancooperative.com/from-states/how-a-dy-registrar-misguides-people-in-mumbai/
The DR ordered removal of three Associates members because as per the definition of Associate Member laid down in the Model Bye Laws 2014 (Drafted for Housing Societies) these three being not the joint owners of the flats were not eligible to join the Committee. The reason for invoking provisions of unregistered bye laws of some other class of Society seems to be the Model is recommended by his boss the Commissioner for Cooperation and the Registrar of Cooperative Societies.
In the case reported by Mirror [Mumbai 2-11-2015] the DR is going to face another lower rank boss Mr. Vikas Rasal the Divisional Joint Registrar (the DJR) on December 3. As per this report a dispute between residents of Jogeshwari-based Oberoi Splendor Flat Owners’ Association (OSFOA) and its developer, Oberoi Realty, over the formation of their housing society had reached the DJR. Reportedly the DJR is issuing a public notice calling members and office bearers to put forth their views at a hearing to be held in his office. The OSFOA accused the DR of colluding with the builder, which was strongly refuted by the DR saying “I deny these allegations. I had registered the society on the grounds that 74 per cent of flat owners had signed in favour of it. The matter is subjudice.“
Curiously the OSFOA had submitted an application to the DJR in June this year seeking de-registration of their Association. In their application, OSFOA, which represents over 1,100 of the 1,290 residents, alleged that the society was formed through fraudulent means. They alleged that though residents began taking possession of the flats in 2011, Oberoi Realty did not form a housing society until 2013, flouting the provisions of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act 1964. This Act makes it mandatory for developers to form a co-operative housing society (CHS) within four months of the date on which 10 people have taken possession of the flats.
The report quotes a statement issued by Oberoi Realty Ltd. “We as developers handed over charge of society affairs to the authorised officer in October 2013. A majority of the society members then formed a provisional committee and took charge from the authorised officer in September 2015.”
This statement is a documentary evidence of how the DR has flouted provisions of Section 77A of the M C S ACT 1960. This Section has been amended with effect from 14 2 2013 by deleting the word Administrator and inserting in its place Authorised officer. This was to circumvent the prohibition of appointing Administrator in cooperative housing societies. The DR has been empowered U/S 77A to authorise one or more of his officers to take over management of the C H S if the Provisional Committee fails to take charge from the developer. The amendment has cut down the maximum permissible tenure of the Authorized Officer from 2 years to six months. Perhaps the DR was not aware of this reduction in the tenure of the Authorised person. The Authorized officer who took charge from the developer as per the statement as aforesaid in October 2013 had to hold elections of the Committee as soon as possible and leave the C H S by end of March 2014. He however remained in charge of the C H S till September 2015 (Completed the entire period of two years as per old provisions of Section77A). The report quotes (Mr. Mohit Bhardwaj) one flat owner and member of OSFOC, who said, “The society was registered by creating a fabricated, backdated proposal with an under-construction alien building which was not in our agreement. We were also made to sign blank society membership forms, only after which we were granted possession of our flats. Major changes were made to these forms.“
It is reportedly alleged that the builder did this in order to cheat flat owners out of the Floor Space Index (FSI) potential of the land on which their building stands. The collective FSI potential would have been worth Rs 2,000Rs 3,000 crore.