Maharashtra: For housing societies, general body is new boss

This decision follows the Bombay High Court’s ruling on October 17, in Baltazar Fernandes vs Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, H-West Ward, Mumbai and Others, which reinforced that the general body’s resolutions are final in redevelopment matters.

Deepak Taware, commissioner for Cooperation and Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Maharashtra (right) CA Ramesh Prabhu, founder chairman, Maharashtra Societies Welfare Association (MahaSEWA)

The registrar’s role has now been clarified as purely administrative — they cannot withhold, amend, or veto any decisions taken by a society’s general body unless explicitly required by law. Any registrar who violates these directives will face disciplinary action by the department.

Deepak Taware, Commissioner for Cooperation and Registrar of Co-operative Societies, State of Maharashtra, said, “Through this circular, we have granted autonomy to societies. Unnecessary interference by registrars will now be curtailed.”

When asked if his office had received any complaints against the registrar. He added that while complaints were received by joint registrars in Mumbai, and some matters reached the high court, his office will soon issue additional circulars to ensure strict compliance and better oversight by registrar and senior officers. When asked if this will make redevelopment easier, Taware replied in the affirmative.

Societies get power back

Advocate Shreeprasad Parab, Expert Director of the Maharashtra State Housing Federation, said, “This is a landmark circular. It ends years of delay caused by unnecessary NOC requirements. The general body is now legally recognised as the ultimate authority on redevelopment — not the registrar. This promotes transparency, strengthens democracy in co-operative housing, and ensures projects move ahead faster.”

Advocate Shreeprasad Parab, expert director of the Maharashtra State Housing Federation

Parab added that the move could help ease the burden on the Bombay High Court, where over 6000 redevelopment-related cases are pending. “It also sets out the principle of the adjudication mechanism, with regards to the hierarchy of the judicial system,” he said.  

Redevelopment on track

CA Ramesh Prabhu, founder chairman of MahaSEWA, said, “Requiring an NOC from the registrar only encouraged corruption. Developers appointed by the general body faced unnecessary delays as the unmandated NOC was withheld until the registrar’s approval. The high court has clearly stated that it is the cooperative society’s responsibility to inform the registrar to appoint an official to supervise redevelopment meetings. If the registrar fails to do so, superior officers should take action based on complaints from societies.

With around 60 cooperative registrars in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) and about 330 across the state, each handling nearly 5 to 10 redevelopment NOC proposals every month, this move will streamline the process and ease the burden on the common man.

The issue of NOCs was discontinued by the government under the ‘Ease of Doing Business’ initiative, which was part of the IOD conditions for issuing commencement certificates. The High Court has also held in several rulings that directions under Section 79A are not mandatory. Since one registrar dismissed a committee for not following Section 79A directions, the court has now ordered an inquiry and disciplinary action against the registrar for contempt of court orders.”

Six points stated in circular:

The Hon'ble High Court has directed this office to issue clear instructions to all Registrars in the state through this circular. Accordingly, the following instructions are being issued to all Registrars:

1.   Once a proposal for the appointment of an Authorized Officer for a special General Body Meeting (GBM) for the redevelopment is received, the Registrar should appoint the Authorized Officer within 14 days. If the Registrar fails to appoint the Authorized Officer within the prescribed period or if the Authorized Officer refuses the appointment, disciplinary action may be taken.

2.   The Authorized Officer appointed by the Registrar must attend the special GBM convened for the selection of a developer for the redevelopment, ensuring that the quorum for the meeting is complete. The Authorized Officer will observe the proceedings of the meeting, verify that the video recording, minutes, voting, and resolution records are properly maintained.

3.   The society must submit copies of the notice, agenda, consent letters from members, video recording, and minutes of the special GBM for the selection of a developer within 15 days to the Registrar’s office, where they must be preserved.

4.   As per the provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, the General Body of the society is the supreme decision-making body. The validity of the special GBM and the decisions made at the meeting will be determined by the Cooperative Court under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. If any member raises an objection or disagrees with the decisions made during the redevelopment process, they should be informed that they can approach the Cooperative Court for a resolution.

5.   The Registrar should not review, amend, or veto any decisions taken in the General Body regarding redevelopment.

6.   Registrars in the state should not accept or process any proposals or applications for "No Objection" regarding redevelopment, nor should they take any action in this regard. Similarly, they should not issue any "No Objection" or similar letters regarding the redevelopment process.

“All Registrars must strictly adhere to the instructions mentioned in this circular. Officers who violate these instructions will be subject to disciplinary action,” the circular (copy with this paper) reads.

"Exciting news! Mid-day is now on WhatsApp Channels Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!