Online Petition
Online Petition > Government/Law
Share it!
Tell A friend OR
Inform Your Friends by: Importing Your Address Book from Email Or Community Site.
Redevelopment of Housing Societies
To/Against/For: DeveloperUNHEALTHY AND UNLAWFUL PRACTICE BY CERTAIN DEVELOPERS IN REDEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING SOCIETIES IN MUMBAI :-( Aftermaths of Development Agreements executed with Societies)
Now a day, the Redevelopment proposals are grossly mooted by the Developers in old and dilapidated Cooperative Housing Societies in Mumbai Central and Suburbs.
As per the Plot area and the loadable TDR/FSI in permissible ratio i.e. 1:1, 1:1.3, 1:2 or 1:2.5 or as applicable, the Developers begin discussions with the Office Bearers/Architect/members of the Societies for the Redevelopment of Society’s property.
The Developers offer the members a bigger and posh dream houses with additional carpet area/rooms over the existing ones, displacement compensation for alternate accommodation, corpus fund and eye-catching amenities etc. The Developers construct either additional flats or commercial joint on the remaining area available at their disposal on the same plot and sale it in open market to earn the surplus. The Development Agreements and the Power of Attorneys are finally executed between the Societies and the Developers to complete the projects.
Initially, to obtain the IOD/CC from MCGM, the Developers submit the plans to MCGM as per the agreed terms in the Development Agreements executed with the Housing Society.
It has been often noticed that thereafter, during the process of redevelopment, the terms of Development Agreements as agreed upon, the unhealthy attempts with ulterior motives are made by the Developers to twist and grossly violate the rules of MRTP and DCR by unlawful planning and constructing additional/unauthorized areas that are beyond their entitlement (i.e. beyond the plot FSI and the TDR/FSI loaded) for their hidden financial gains. The buyers of such unlawful flats/properties land themselves in deals that lead to litigation at a later date.
At this stage, the Developers submit the amended plans for additional structures to MCGM which are not in conformity with the Development Agreements executed and additional/unauthorized constructions are carried out without informing beforehand or seeking formal approval from the Society's architect/Society as per the rules and bye-laws or execution and registration of further necessary Agreements to this effect.
The ill- observance of MRTP/MCGM/DCR rules and guidelines are overlooked by the sympathetic officials of the MCGM and the plans so submitted, are sanctioned without verifying the eligibility or its conformity with the Development Agreements. The Projects are completed and the Occupancy Certificates are issued without the proper inspection neither carried out by the MCGM officials nor taking pains to verify whether the actual measurement of the constructed areas tally with the final plans submitted.
It is further noticed that upon the completion of the projects, these additional/unauthorized constructions are silently regularized at the last moment by executing the Supplemental Agreements with the Office Bearers of the Societies with green handshakes/offering them handsome rewards.
Further, it is learnt that in many Societies, the Managing Committees, who execute the documents with the Developers, do not possess any legal holding as they have never filed/nor aware of filing the Indemnity Bond in Form M-20 on a Stamp required under Section 73(1AB) and Rule 58A of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act 1960. The members who fail to execute such Bonds within the spicific period are deemed to have vacated his office as a member of the committee and no legal effects can be given to the documents executed by them with the Developers.
The gullible members of the Societies, unaware of the laws and rules, are taken for a ride by the Developers and the satisfied Office Bearers together with their interested associates once the projects are completed and since the members aim to get themselves re-housed in the redeveloped premises and on the other hand, the hidden financial benefits of such unauthorized/additional areas go to the Developers.
There are numerous news clips in various news papers with regard to Mumbai High Court’s reprimanding and lambasting severely the MCGM for violation of Development Control Act & Rules and are instructed to immediately issue the demolition orders to pull down such unauthorized/additional constructions and take stringent action against the erring officials for their lapses. Reference is necessary for the latest news appeared in Times City of Times of India Dated 12th Sept.2008-Illegal Constructions: HC blasts MCGM and MHADA for illegal and unauthorized constructions on Andheri-Versova- Jogeshwari belt have come under scanner of the Mumbai High Court.
Under the Development Control Rules, it has been stated that in case of unauthorized development, the Commissioner shall - (a) take suitable action which may include demolition of unauthorized works as provided in section 53 of the MRTP Act, 1966 and the relevant provisions of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 and shall take suitable action against the licensed technical person or the architect concerned.
Upholding the law for the welfare of the community is more valuable for society than extra heap of cement and concrete. Plenty of judgments are overlooked by greedy Developers to earn extra money.
The members of the Cooperative Housing Societies in Mumbai are required to be vigilant while handing over their Societies for redevelopment to such Developers who, by rewarding the Office Bearers and their associates, carry out the unauthorized/additional constructions for their hidden financial gains which they are not entitled to. When unauthorized constructions beyond the laws are the statutory norms of such Developers rather than the exception to the rules, the strict laws of the land have always to be upheld by taking stern actions under the laws.
Dilip Shah, Andheri West, Mumbai.
dilip7shah@gmail.com
Recent Comments
| Name | Comment | |
| deepak gandhi | what is the procedure to be followed for the redevelopment of the society wherein we have 19 residential flats (including 2 commercial) 2 garages which are now converted to commercials and 11 shops | |
| Raj | Dear all I live in a co-operative society in mumbai, our building is merely 8 years old. Unfortunately, most of the original members sold off their flats and the new people who moved in have been talking about re-development ever since (claiming leaks in their houses and no one is willing to spare money for repairs)..the entire society is gearing to tear the building down (for greed), except me. What are my rights. Thankyou. Kind regards TPS | |
| Ashok Chindarkar | The Mg.Com. of the Society has signed the final Redevelopment Agreement with the Developer on 23rd March 2010. The Mg Com. was elected on 26th September 2009 but did not file the Indemnity Bond as required in terms of Sec.73(1AB)of MCS Act, 1960. There are 40 members of the Society and 31 members are in favour of the Agreement. The Registrar appointed the Administrator on the Society on 19th June 2010 on complaint of 9 other members. 1. Is the Agreement signed by the Mg. Com. in absence of Form M-20 (73-1AB) is valid? 2. Whether the same agreement can be signed by new Mg. Com.after complying the provisions of Sec.73 (1AB) without starting a fresh the entire procedure? 3. The proposal of the Developer was accepted in August 2007 (Sec.73-1AB not complied by then Mg. Com.) and the Agreement was signed in March 2010. 4. The nine members want to start the process of redevelopment a fresh as per Govt directive dated 3rd January 2009. This directive was not followed by the Mg. Com. at any time during the process as they said that the said Govt. directive was not applicable to them as the proposal was approved in Aug. 2007 although further process such as reduction in additional carpet area and signinig the Development Agreement took place after 3rd January 2009. Now, I want to know, whether the same agreement signed by old illegal Com. is valid or the New Com. will have to start a fresh the entire procedure? | |
| siddharth d shah | without calling egm can managing committee can give interest letter to developer taking 10% of amount from developer as offer by corpus fund by developer. they not discuses the detail of the interest letter in any egm. without agenda in EGM interest of some members of managing committee pass the such unknown resoulation without taking prior informed to the society members its valid . | |
| anil | i want to build the flats on my plot which i had perchased before 30 years whis is situated in the co oprative housing society. pleas guide me how i can build the falt system and sale the flats | |
| Shailendra Salvi | Can a chairman alot flats for other committee members as per his wish, when it was decided that alottment will be as per lottery | |
| Hanif khan | can a developer and the society member neglect a official tenant staying there for last 21 years with all the relevant document in his name and construct the building? The property belongs to mhada. | |
| cedric | can interested soc.members/committee members be appointed as consultants, architects, engineers etc for their society re-developement works??? | |
| prakash | 1. what are the precautions as regards re-dev. of society ,allotment of flats, alloting car space to members,bank guarantee etc 2. can single member of society can stop redevelopment of any society ? 3. the old Managing committee has entered into redevelopment agreement with the builder without executing bond under sec 58A.Now new committee has formed and are carrying on the same project with the same builder: do new committee has to start a fresh process,since decision taken by old committee are void & invalid? pls help | |
| suresh | can the society do court consultam with the builder before going for redevelopment |
Sign the above petition