Fw: [DwarkaForum] Re: TENANTS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS FOR MANAGEMENT OF ONE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY
diwan singh
happening right in our neighborhood. This issue merits serious attention. By
ignoring we are perpetuating injustice in society. Any act of injustice
tolerated always bounce back in some form or other in a stronger manner.
Tenants are very much part of Dwarka sub city. at times they are in equal
number in a society.If we exploit them, we are only spoiling the atmosphere
for all of us.
Also by quoting examples of other countries we can not get away with
injustice. There are different rules and conditions in different
countries.And if other do unjustified things,does not mean we also do the
same.
Diwan singh
----- Original Message -----
From: "vmadhu" <madhu...@gmail.com>
To: "DWARKA FORUM (Regd)" <dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 9:54 PM
Subject: [DwarkaForum] Re: TENANTS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS FOR MANAGEMENT
OF ONE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY
Hi Gentlemen,
It seems that such topics doesn't need to push beyond certain
length ,should be avoided also.
Forum is primarily to share the common problem and experience in
Dwarka Subcity and other topics effecting Dwarka.
Don't personalize the topics.
Best regards
Madhukar V.
On Dec 20, 6:27 pm, Mahendra Kumar Gupta <mkgupta1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> REVISED (PL. DON�T PUT EARLIER MAIL AS PER LATEST INFORMATION FORM
> RELIABLE
> SOURCE, AGM HAS PASSED ONE RESOLUTION RAISING MAINTANCE CHARGES WHILE THE
> POSITION ABOUT THE PARKING CHARGES IS NOT YET CLEAR YET). **
>
> *TENANTS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS FOR MANAGEMENT OF GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY
> IN DWARKA*
>
> Management of Shri Radha Group Housing Society, Plot No. 3, Sector 9,
> Dwarka
> has decided that the tenants will pay Rs. 1,500 per month as maintenance
> charges, while the owners will continue to pay Rs 1,000. It has also been
> proposed to charge Rs. 1000 per month for the second car and Rs 1500 for
> the
> third car from the tenants but this will not be charged from the
> flat-owners. Why this discrimination? The tenants do not use more
> facilities
> or parking space to warrant them for paying additional amount while
> getting
> same or equal services/ facilities. This amounts to unjustified
> discrimination between haves and have-nots.
>
> It seems that the Management of the Society considers the tenants as
> second-class residents if not third class. Tomorrow, such practice may be
> followed by the Managements of others societies. Mr. Ashok Chaitanya,
> Advocate said that the practice may be declared illegal, if challenged.
>
> M. K. Gupta, 1034, Plot No. 23, Sec. 10, Dwarka, New Delhi.
> Phone�9810550172.
--
===========================================================NOTE:
Any message posted will be Sole "RESPONSIBILITY" of the
"SENDER(Post-Author)". The Moderator and owner of this blog googlegroup have
NO Responsibility.
===========================================================
===========================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"DWARKA-FORUM" :-- Dwarka Ki Awaaz
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Dwarka-residents?hl=en
Posting Rules:
Visit at http://groups.google.com/group/Dwarka-residents/web/posting-rules
===========================================================
REJIMON C K
District Consumer Court
South West Delhi
AFNOE (T)/Adm/2010
05 Jan 2011
SUBJECT: DIFFERENTIAL MAINTENANCE CHARGES
FROM THE TENANTS OF AIR FORCE & NAVAL OFFICERS CGHS, DWARKA
Dear Sir,
1. The aggrieved tenants of AFNO CGHS (Regn No. 477/79) of Sector-7, Dwarka, bring to the notice of your august office the indiscriminate, unjust and illogical decisions being enforced by the Management Committee of AFNO CGHS, Dwarka.
2. AFNO CGHS has a total of 380 flats, out of which more than 120 are occupied by tenants.
3. The Management Committee has enhanced the maintenance charges for tenants from Rs 700/- to Rs 1500/-, which is nearly 120% increase, from the month of October 2010. The owners are paying only Rs 700/-. The ad hoc and sudden increase in maintenance charges for tenants becomes null and void in the light of the following observations:
(a) The maintenance charge is attributed as per each dwelling unit and is not attributable to a person.
(b) Unless there are differential privileges extended to different members, they can not be charged differently. Out here, tenants are not only being asked to pay extra – indirectly, but they are also being asked to park their cars outside at extra costs. This is totally illegal, discriminatory and illogical.
(c) The maintenance charges are to be shared equally by all members (in this case owners and not tenants). It is the arrangement between the tenant and owner in the form of a lease deed, which defines who will pay what and in what proportion.
(d) So as a matter of fact, the management must obtain willingness of those owners to pay extra, who have rented out their flat to tenants. Thereafter, it is up to tenant whether they accept to pay this additional amount or share with the owner or not pay at all.
(e) The rent for a flat is decided based on the total ambience and facilities of the society. Besides, the facilities are created from the money paid by members (owners) who in some case are generating revenue for the society also. In case it is considered as subsidy for the owners, it should be paid back to owners. Charging tenants extra for the facilities already paid by the owners amounts to double-charging for the same facility.
(f) In any case, Bye Laws do not cater for provision of any subsidies to be extended to few and denied to the rest on the basis of management discretion.
(g) The tenants came to know of the increase only on receipt of demand bill for the month of Oct 2010. The management committee has put up the minutes of the SGM on notice board only on 30 Nov 10 after receipt of application from tenants on 28 Nov 10.
(h) Para 102(3) of DCS 2007 makes it amply clear that before bringing into effect any change in the charges for essential services, the matter needs to be disseminated to all residents of the society. In this case the same was not followed by the Management Committee.
(j) Provisions of Para 102(2) of DCS 2007 also stipulate that the Management Committee needs to spell out the basis of fixing charges for essential services, however, the present Management Committee decided of enhancing the charges without spelling out the logic behind it.
(k) Provisions of Para 51 sub Para 4 of DCS 2007 stipulates that notice of general body meetings shall be given to each member of the society either personally or by post under U.P.C. seven days prior to the meeting. For the SGM on 24 Oct 10, no notice was sent to the members.
(l) From the minutes of SGM held on 24 Oct 10 it is evident that out of 380 members only 15 members attended the meeting. As per provisions of Para 48 sub Para 3 of DCS 2007, in case of quorum is not complete even after adjourning the meeting for half an hour, the meeting shall stand dissolved provided it is mentioned in the notice that no quorum is necessary. In this case major decisions favouring the owners (staying within the society) only were taken though the required quorum was not present. It is shocking to note that only 15 interested members took the decision which itself is a miniscule community.
(m) From the minutes of the SGM held on 24 Oct 10, it also comes out glaringly that no decision was taken on the issue of removal of rebate in electricity bill of members as it was not in the interest of members and safely the same has been referred to a board. As regards increase in Maintenance charges for tenants, decision to enforce was taken straight way without taking into cognizance that the SGM did not have the requisite numbers of members to deliberate and take a decision; on the contrary there are lots of owners/members who are not in agreement with this decision and accordingly conveyed their disagreement to Management Committee.
4. The Management Committee has been enforcing rules which are contrary to natural justice and totally biased. All these decisions are not supported by logic or reason but sheer autocracy. Following decisions amplify the prioritized agenda being pursued by the Management Committee:
(a) Delhi Electric Supply Corporation provides 15% rebate on the electricity bill to all consumers of the society. This rebate is extended to all consumers as the requisite infrastructure within the society is created and maintained by the society itself. This management committee is extending the 15 % rebate to all owners but not to the tenants. It is unclear as to which rule authorises the committee to take such decisions.
(b) The owners are permitted to park their second car inside the society without any charges, whereas, for tenants the second car is parked outside the society and also charged Rs 250/- per car.
(c) Lately the management Committee has instructed that tenants are not allowed to keep any pet, whereas, the members are allowed to keep. This is totally unfair and illegal as in today’s urban families, pets are very much part of a family. Bombay High Court in its recent ruling emphatically stated that pets are integral part of a family and can not be treated in isolation.
5. From the above it can be ascertained that the management committee is functioning in a partisan manner and contrary to the principles of a co-operative society. This type of attitude by the committee spoils the fabric of harmony which binds the residents of a society. Tenants are only an extension of owner and to be treated that way. As far as rules are concerned tenants are only responsible to their landlords and society only acknowledges the members. Even the monthly bill generated by society is in the name of member and not in the name of tenant.
6. It is requested that a holistic view on the issue may be taken and appropriate instructions may be issued to the society to withdraw all directives which are in contravention to existing rules and natural justice. It will not be out of place to mention that the Management Committee has not paid any heed to the application submitted by the tenants on 28 Nov 2010 and not even bothered to acknowledge the receipt of it and it surely is an indicator of the noble intentions of the Committee.
Thanking you in anticipation.
Yours sincerely,
Sd/
Air Cmde B Mukerjee (Retd)
on behalf of All Tenants of AFNO CGHS.
> REVISED (PL. DON’T PUT EARLIER MAIL AS PER LATEST INFORMATION FORM
> RELIABLE
> SOURCE, AGM HAS PASSED ONE RESOLUTION RAISING MAINTANCE CHARGES WHILE THE
> POSITION ABOUT THE PARKING CHARGES IS NOT YET CLEAR YET). **
>
> *TENANTS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS FOR MANAGEMENT OF GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY
> IN DWARKA*
>
> Management of Shri Radha Group Housing Society, Plot No. 3, Sector 9,
> Dwarka
> has decided that the tenants will pay Rs. 1,500 per month as maintenance
> charges, while the owners will continue to pay Rs 1,000. It has also been
> proposed to charge Rs. 1000 per month for the second car and Rs 1500 for
> the
> third car from the tenants but this will not be charged from the
> flat-owners. Why this discrimination? The tenants do not use more
> facilities
> or parking space to warrant them for paying additional amount while
> getting
> same or equal services/ facilities. This amounts to unjustified
> discrimination between haves and have-nots.
>
> It seems that the Management of the Society considers the tenants as
> second-class residents if not third class. Tomorrow, such practice may be
> followed by the Managements of others societies. Mr. Ashok Chaitanya,
> Advocate said that the practice may be declared illegal, if challenged.
>
> M. K. Gupta, 1034, Plot No. 23, Sec. 10, Dwarka, New Delhi.
> Phone–9810550172.
--
===========================================================NOTE:
Any message posted will be Sole "RESPONSIBILITY" of the
"SENDER(Post-Author)". The Moderator and owner of this blog googlegroup have
NO Responsibility.
===========================================================
===========================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"DWARKA-FORUM" :-- Dwarka Ki Awaaz
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Dwarka-residents?hl=en
Posting Rules:
Visit at http://groups.google.com/group/Dwarka-residents/web/posting-rules
===========================================================
--
===========================================================NOTE:
Any message posted will be Sole "RESPONSIBILITY" of the "SENDER(Post-Author)". The Moderator and owner of this blog googlegroup have NO Responsibility.
===========================================================
===========================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DWARKA-FORUM" :-- Dwarka Ki Awaaz
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Dwarka-residents?hl=en
Posting Rules:
Visit at http://groups.google.com/group/Dwarka-residents/web/posting-rules
===========================================================
--
REJIMON C K.
Each year 50million trees and 75 billion water is used to create 7 million tonnes of mail, over 40% of which is thrown away unopened. source : National Geographic so the next time you receive paper, think again before you print. choose to receive emails instead .
sushil kumar
I am not awre of the background but there are strong logic behind this.
1.Apart from the routine maintenence there are services which all enjoy(Including tanents) and for which tanents may not have contributed or likely to do so.
2.I am not saying all tanents are equal but our experience shows that their attitude towards the society is not so sensitive and at least in our society 80% cases of recklessness have been noticed on account of tanents.Misuse of water,electricity is normal feature.
I have come across with various instances where they use to say "if i am wasting water and electricity but i am paying also for that''.
These attitude may have forced for such disriminatory rulling.
But even then I strongly feel that this can not be welcomed.Yes their apathy is equally important and needs to be corrected.
Regards
Sushil
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 10:39:07 +0530
Subject: Re: Fw: [DwarkaForum] Re: TENANTS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS FOR MANAGEMENT OF ONE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY
From: reji...@gmail.com
To: dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
===========================================================
NOTE:-- Any message posted will be Sole "RESPONSIBILITY" of the "SENDER(Post-Author)". The Moderator and owner of this blog googlegroup have NO Responsibility.
===========================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DWARKA-FORUM" :-- Dwarka Ki Awaaz
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Dwarka-residents?hl=en
Posting Rules:
===========================================================
Police- 100 & 1090 Ambulance 102 & 1099, Fire 101, Traffic 1095/23010101, Dwarka PS: 28051584, ACP-28051587, DCP -28042984.
SDM-25017834, Child-1098, Women-1091, Sr. Citizen 1291, Postal 1914, AIIMS-26588700, Blood Bank, 23716441, ORBO 1060, Eye-1919, Disaster Management- 1070. LG Complaints 155355, CMO 155345, MCD-1266/25321235/23910419, DDA-24690431, DJB-1916, MTNL-198
Brij
Unfortunately I am a tenant in one of the society in dwarka and My experience is totally opposite --
"1.Apart from the routine maintenence there are services which all enjoy(Including tanents) and for which tanents may not have contributed or likely to do so."
"2.I am not saying all tanents are equal but our experience shows that their attitude towards the society is not so sensitive and at least in our society 80% cases of recklessness have been noticed on account of tanents.Misuse of water,electricity is normal feature."
Brij
Ajay Gupta
--
Regards
Ajay Gupta
Anoop Rohera
The attitude of tenants cannot be generalized. I am sure few people have such attitude regardless they are owners or tenants. I have been into the similar situation as AFNO when I stayed in sec 9. It makes no sense that a tenant is penalized & treated as a second citizen. I strongly oppose the intention of such RAWs attitude. A lot of RWA groups in Dwarka have a lot of liberty over other residents and this is a typical scenario. This is a total misuse of their power and violation of one’s consumer right. I condemn it on the moral ground as well. Such un-thoughtful decisions cannot be accepted.
I also think such decisions cannot spread harmony when 30% residents are tenants in a society and I am sure there are uncivilized elements both sides.
Anoop Rohera
a.meh...@saboocoatings.com
Furthermore, even if the car is not parked in the society premises but the tenant has purchased two car stickers , he has to pay Rs 1000 per month.
We need to find a solution for this and would request the expert advice of learned people from DF.
Regards
Anil
Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel
Krishna Kumar
Such an arbitrary decisions of the concerned MCs are not acceptable and needs to be taken up appropriately against the concerned MCs. Besides, it violates fundamental right to equality
it is not compatable to peace and harmony since such decisions of MCs causes heart burning to the affected personsw. I hope wisdom may pervail upon the concerned MCs
|
arun
This is sheer misuse of power by MC.
I have not seen a single society who does not have problem with MC.
They just want power to do THANEDAARI in the society.
There might be some lucky ones staying in well managed society.
They even make members to feel as their tenants.
They are not interested in doing anything in the welfare of the
society or residents, they are just concerned about the collection of
money by means of putting extra burdon of water charges,electricity
charges, parking charges, fines, and many other non sense charges.
They run the society like our Netas are runiing our Delhi and our
Country.I don't understand why these MC people forget that co-
operative society is like a family and everyone is known to each
other. Why to discriminate and create disharmony by doing this kind
deeds?
It has to be stopped.
Request to Mr.Rejimon and other diginified forum members, advocate to
suggest the way out to these MC own rules and regulations. There has
to be accountability towards MC also if they do not perform or
unneccearily trouble some one. There has to be some rulling or some
action against their attitude. There has to be some guidelines on the
working of the MC. It should not be few people sit in the AGM and
decide the fate of the residents. There has to be some PIL against
these rule of law.
Whosoever sits on MC chair start misbehaving and start thinking
himself lord of all. The power of chair has to be stopped.
Please suggest any thing can be done to eradicate this problem of
TANASHAHI by every MC.
Rgds
Arun
On Jan 7, 8:54 am, Krishna Kumar <kumark...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> Such an arbitrary decisions of the concerned MCs are not acceptable and needs to be taken up appropriately against the concerned MCs. Besides, it violates fundamental right to equality
> it is not compatable to peace and harmony since such decisions of MCs causes heart burning to the affected personsw. I hope wisdom may pervail upon the concerned MCs
> K C Kumar
> From: a.mehro...@saboocoatings.com <a.mehro...@saboocoatings.com>
> Subject: Re: [DwarkaForum] Re: TENANTS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS FORMANAGEMENT OF ONE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY
> To: dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
> Date: Thursday, 6 January, 2011, 9:27 PM
>
> I too am staying in sector 5 Shakti Apts society where wef 1st Dec , the management committee has decided to charge Rs 1000 per month extra from tenants only for having the second car per car . This is not applicable for owners who are also resident of the society and the owners can have the privilege of two cars.
>
> Furthermore, even if the car is not parked in the society premises but the tenant has purchased two car stickers , he has to pay Rs 1000 per month.
>
> We need to find a solution for this and would request the expert advice of learned people from DF.
>
> Regards
> Anil
> Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel
>
> Sender: dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 14:35:53 +0530
> To: <dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com>
> ReplyTo: dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [DwarkaForum] Re: TENANTS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS FOR MANAGEMENT OF ONE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY
>
> I Too was staying as a tenant in a society in Sec-10. I landed in a problem with the security of the society. when i complained to the President, they merely told me to shutup as I was a tenant and had no right to complaint. I then complained to my landlord who came and roughed up the President for this misgiving.
> My suggestion is that the landlords of such tenants should come and take the case up with the MC, as the tenants are their reps in the society.
>
>
> Dear all,
> I am not awre of the background but there are strong logic behind this.
>
> 1.Apart from the routine maintenence there are services which all enjoy(Including tanents) and for which tanents may not have contributed or likely to do so.
>
> 2.I am not saying all tanents are equal but our experience shows that their attitude towards the society is not so sensitive and at least in our society 80% cases of recklessness have been noticed on account of tanents.Misuse of water,electricity is normal feature.
>
> I have come across with various instances where they use to say "if i am wasting water and electricity but i am paying also for that''.
> These attitude may have forced for such disriminatory rulling.
> But even then I strongly feel that this can not be welcomed.Yes their apathy is equally important and needs to be corrected.
>
> Regards
>
> Sushil
>
>
>
> Subject: Re: Fw: [DwarkaForum] Re: TENANTS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS FOR MANAGEMENT OF ONE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY
> To: dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
>
> Here is Fresh info on this matter while received on the alert service.http://www.consumercourtforum.in/f5/air-force-naval-officers-enclave-...
>
> read more »
REJIMON C K
Rejimon
Shub-Chintak Group for
Effective Management of CGHSs in Dwarka
(T. Sampath Kumar, Dwarka)
Why are the majority of the Management Committees (MCs) of Dwarka's Cooperative Group Housing Societies (CGHSs) not performing their duties? Why the residents in these tall buildings are not happy? What is plaguing these Societies which are supposed to be symbols of cooperation, harmony and self-management? Why are these compact Societies becoming breeding grounds for group politics and mismanagement? Why are these CGHSs comprising of educated mass failing to manage their own affairs? Importantly, why are they paving way for an external administrator to sit in their own compound to run their own affairs? Is it not a shame on the residents of a given Society? What is ailing these Societies? Why are the members / residents passive and not taking active role in making the MCs effective, transparent and accountable? What are the factors? Is it money / power / authority or combination of complex factors that are impacting the management of these Societies? How long this will continue in Dwarka?
My purpose of this article is not to bombard the readers with questions! These are some of the questions keep popping up during informal conversations and social chats in Dwarka. "We did not know any thing till a few days ago. Now we see an administrator is sitting in our Society to manage our affairs. This will increase our recurring charges as we need to pay Administrator's salary and related expenditure." a friend shared with us in indignation. Another resident from another Society revealed: "Ours is a big society with more than 200 apartments. Group politics did not allow the MC to function properly. The equation between the MC, a group of residents and the builder had deteriorated with time. All these lead to the appointment of an Administrator." He – a concerned resident - does not see any ray of hope for normalcy in near future. It is also heard that individuals with vested interests some how manage to drag the period of administration (in collusion with the administrator?) to delay the elections. According to knowledgeable people in Dwarka, there are at least fifteen Societies in Dwarka currently managed by the Administrators appointed by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies. This number may increase as we keep hearing turbulences in Societies.
Root causes: Money seems to be one of the key reasons of the malady. CGHSs are being formed at the behest of a few enlightened people with common interests. During the construction phase, the members’ association and involvement with day to day affairs of the MC does not exist. MCs organize periodic meetings and present progress of the construction, problems being faced and cost escalations to its members. Usually, the construction period takes several years to complete and often go beyond the estimated timeframes by several years! Costs overrun. Members pay additional amounts to see their dreams one day are realised. Not able to cope up with increased costs (and for other reasons), sadly members leave the Societies. This phase is most vulnerable for siphoning the Society's money as members are not at one place, and not well organized to raise their voices. The relationship between the Society and the contractor / builder, in most of the cases, gets spoiled during this time leading to legal battles. It is believed that builder and the MC join hands by sacrificing the larger interests of the Society members. Unfortunately, majority of the members fall in line with the decisions of the MC in good faith as the circumstances does not allow them for closer scrutiny of records, expenditure and quality of work. Exit and entry of new members also add another angle for potential irregularities and mismanagement. Due to some peculiar circumstances and poor financial planning, a few Societies ended up with large sums (several lakhs to crores) money with them. This is a strong pull for ill minded people to get into the management of Societies. In addition, hungry for authority, to corner undue benefits, to settle scores with opponents are also considered some of the causes for vested people to enter into the management of the Societies.
Passive participation of members / residents: Once the Societies get filled up with respective members (and tenants), communities emerge in these compounds. There is a big scope for these captive members (which was not possible during the construction phase) to take active roles in the affairs of the Societies on a concurrent basis. Unfortunately, the MC meetings, special meetings and General Body meetings are poorly attended, inadequately participated by the members / residents in the deliberations. This is a serious setback to already poorly conducted meetings by the MCs. Group politics flare up, discussions suffer, agenda gets sidelined and intended output does not come out at the end of the meeting. By the time meetings come to a formal closure, only a few people are present. There were instances where meetings were conducted with police around as a precautionary measure to prevent unwanted incidents in the Society.
What needs to be done: How do we make MCs efficient, effective, accountable, transparent and professional in managing the Societies’ affairs? Usually MCs consist of small number (7 – 15) of elected people. There will be always sizeable people who do not want to be a part of an "elected body" but wish to contribute towards the betterment of the Society. In a typical CGHS, there will be people with expertise, knowledge, skills and experiences from different fields which could be tapped for smooth running of Societies. One way to tap in-house abilities is through formation of sub-committees on various themes / tasks (seepage, environment, quality water supply, finance, civil works etc). These sub-committees are formed by the MC which again will have some inherent problems of groupism, antagonism and obstructionism. Often, members are forced to be part of the sub-committees to protect (or represent) the interests of groups leading to sub-optimal delivery of services. On the basis of my six years of living in a Dwarka CGHS, listening to a few Societies’ performances, group dynamics and interrelationships among the MC members of Dwarka and elsewhere, I propose a group of individuals who really care for the betterment of the society. I prefer to call it as "Shub-Chintak Group" with a watch-dog role having a structure without any bias for any group / individuals but only for truth, good governance and transparency. A group with volunteers without any hierarchical structure is expected to commit itself for the betterment of the society. The primary objective of this Group is to protect the interests (hence Shub-Chintak) of the Society and help the MC in a pro-active manner discharging its responsibilities in an efficient manner.
How to form a Shub-Chintak Group: Concerned members of any Society who are willing to see smooth management, and protect the entitlements of the members / tenants, should volunteer full heartedly with no hungry for power and authority to come forward to form this Group. Its role should be to strengthen the MC by making an objective assessment of its work on a regular basis and contribute by giving critical inputs to the MC for improved performance and efficiency. These sensitized residents are expected to spend little more time and actively participate compared to the silent majority who are often passive and do not contribute in any manner. Shub-Chintak Group is expected to do a watchdog role by constantly monitoring the MC’s work and contributes productively for increased performance for larger good of the Society. The proposed Group is an ideal informal institution for motivating women to take active part and contribute to add value to collective wisdom. It is conceived that this Group can fill a critical gap by bridging smaller group of elected body (MC) and a larger passive body in a given CGHS to realize the fuller benefits of cooperative principles. It can also effectively prevent the appointment of administrators by identifying the problems at an early stage for corrections. MCs can benefit significantly from this Group so that problems can be addressed quickly to keep the administrators at bay.
Risks: Sustenance of Shub-Chintak Group will not be a cake walk. People will have apprehensions about the ‘yet another’ Group in a Society. The MCs (with highly polarized groups) can oppose at once against this initiative in their respective Societies. As this Group is expected to work like a CCTV camera, MCs can create hurdles to kill this initiative at its embryonic stage. If people are committed to form this Group, MC can try to place ‘their agents’ in the group. Truth has immense power to weed out such people from the Group in due course. Results may not come that easily therefore perseverance and patience are required. The challenge is to sell the idea and promote that Shub-Chintak Group as a friend –not a foe- of the MC for cleaner administration. If necessary, Group needs to embrace Gandhigiri by involving all the residents for common good. Apartments are edifices of Societies and Societies are edifices of Dwarka. A beginning needs to be made before it is too late.
--------((((((o))))))-------
--
===========================================================
NOTE:-- Any message posted will be Sole "RESPONSIBILITY" of the "SENDER(Post-Author)". The Moderator and owner of this blog googlegroup have NO Responsibility.
===========================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DWARKA-FORUM" :-- Dwarka Ki Awaaz
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Dwarka-residents?hl=en
Posting Rules:
Visit at https://sites.google.com/site/dwarkaforum/
===========================================================
Police- 100 & 1090 Ambulance 102 & 1099, Fire 101, Traffic 1095/23010101, Dwarka PS: 28051584, ACP-28051587, DCP -28042984.
SDM-25017834, Child-1098, Women-1091, Sr. Citizen 1291, Postal 1914, AIIMS-26588700, Blood Bank, 23716441, ORBO 1060, Eye-1919, Disaster Management- 1070. LG Complaints 155355, CMO 155345, MCD-1266/25321235/23910419, DDA-24690431, DJB-1916, MTNL-198
sc arora
S C Arora.
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:43:53 +0530
Subject: Re: [DwarkaForum] Re: TENANTS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS FORMANAGEMENT OF ONE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY