Observations on Draft SGM MoM held on 30 April 2016.

[Sanjay Kumar Shrivastava]

Dear all

I have made some of the observation on SGM MoM. Kindly go thru. Regarding Financial status and HOTO  need to have specific points from Mr. Sarup and Umesh Sharma.

================================

Dear Sh. Verma
Secretary of ACHSL

This has reference to the above.

Kindly note the following observations as they were not reproduced/recorded properly. These are required to be taken into consideration while making the minutes final

1. Item IV. Adoption of model by laws - Please incorporate Brig. Sharam prakash responded on query of Sh. Vijay Sarup and stated that society would like to amend many bye laws suiting to our interest and not only reduction of term from 5 years to 2 years. To which Sh. Sarup said that this point should be recorded in minutes. It was also pointed out that 97th amendment of constitution was applicable to the earlier tenure of MC also. However, earlier MC in their wisdom upheld Registrar suggestion of conducting election. The decision taken up in AGM has been respected.

2. Case against CSD Canteen- it was never passed that the case against CSD shall be withdrawn.

3. Case against Mr. Umesh Sharma under Goonda act- It may be noted that all the complaints filed against Mr. Sharma is due to his official capacity. Further, it was approved by MC on the basis of approval by General body and is recorded in one of the minutes of meeting. Current office bearer cannot overrule and apply different parameter now and reverse the decision of general body with retrospect. Also it is to be noted that the chapter proceedings has been withdrawn by police in absence of any fact.

3. Case filed by Rajeev Gupta - Kindly note that MC has tried reimbursing  the amount basis General body approval and under no circumstances MC can be held responsible as this matter was discussed threadbare in General body and MC acted on it.  Also kindly note that only Col.  Bhandari had said that money should be recovered from Ex MC who were looking into this and was shouted down by the members present.

4. Case filed by Umesh Sharma against one individual-  You are required to note the history of complaint. It was done because that individual has made false complaint against MC. Also decision taken by one AGM just cannot be overruled by another SGM with retrospect. You are required to correct the recording and must not use such resolution which are legally and morally incorrect.

5. Removal of two staff from society. Please insert this topic as it was brought up by Chairman and discussed that MC should take decision about the staff.

Best Wishes

Sanjay Shrivastava

[Umesh Sharma]

sanjay/dear all

my observations are as under

item no.1 : specific law was quoted by mr anil sharma regarding the agenda points that cannot be taken up in the SGM these were

                (a) budget

                 (b) all other points by permission of the chair

                

item no. 5: objection to induction of new members attendance was taken up and the view by Mr anil sharma was that the notice said that only members of ACHS can attend, whereas the members who were to be inducted signed the attendance register before they were inducted by GB. objection to some of the members by Umesh sharma that these members opposed the civilian voting rights/ formation of co operative society and conveyance of land in different forums which is against the interest of the society and the bye laws. this needs to be added in the minutes.

item VI:  (v) new security agency : what rate and selection process and no GB approval.

              (vi) and (VII) details of reports not discussed in GB and approval not taken.

item VII: (a)please refer to the GB approval for conveyance in AGM dated 14th nov 2010item no.7 formation of co operative societyand MC authorised to hire alawyer to expedite formation and conveyanse including signing tripartite agreement between awho and cidco.         where Rs 10000 per member was approved by general body.

             deemed conveyance was jeopardised by some members who approached CIDCO MD not to give deemed conveyance. this was after the file being closed for order twice. the chairman quoted MOM of MC where the MC was informed that we may have to approach high court for relief since JT registerar who is cidco employee may not acceed to our application though we have fulfilled all requirements.

brig dharam prakash though has been senior most member has not taken any step to take awho into confidence, the MC has filed case only after they had exhausted all avenues.

             (b) audit was conducted by ACC thane and is there in the records.and observations were made by auditor which were complied with. some members again approached for re audit, which is the case now pending. there is no illegal transfer of funds pls refer GB 8th may 2011 under item no 6 any other points   resolution of  where GB approved the funds to be spent and bal to be transferred to ACHS.

(c) case against CSD to be withdrawn was not passed, what GB authorised the MC is to take steps to get a good rent from them and inform the GB regarding progress, understand the case is being withdrawn and GB doesnot know what terms have been finalised.

(d) the MC has not done its home work, pls check the complaints on which the case was filed, it was against umesh sharma as chairman. as per AGM resolution of 24th august 2014 item 15 GB resolved that any complaints that are frivolous in nature against any member of MC , MC authorised to take action against erring members. it is pertinent to note that the case was dismissed by ACP after intervention of High Court. instead of the MC trying to recover from members who complained and lost it is trying to recover from the member. this is a pure witch hunt and we shall not pay the society the expenses incurred.

(e) please refer to point no.8 of minutes of AGM dated 24th august 2014 under leakage issues pertaining to B102/202. the MC has followed procedure and GB had sanctioned amount of Rs 2.18 lacs. where is the question of MC being held responsible/ case has been filed by capt rajiv  gupta and not by MC.

(f) the complaint to police in writing by k.p tanwar who is neither a flat owner/ nor associate member of society specificaly has mentioned umesh sharma and venkat krishnan as chairman and secretary who have misappropriated 75 thousand refundable deposit. which is not true.

legal notice was sent for him to appologise only after that a defamation suit was filed please refer minutes of AGM dated 24th August item no. 15 where GB has authorised MC to take action against frivolous complainrts against member of MC. question of MC or member paying is out of question.

umesh sharma

Virus-free. www.avast.com

Sanjay Shrivastava

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ACHSMC group. To post to this group, send email to ach...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to achsmc+un...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/achsmc?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ACHSMC" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to achsmc+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.