Serious byelaw violations by our interim EC, questions on their legality

[Phase II Working Committee]

Hi All

There have been innumerable violations by the interim EC and they are now taking shield behind the progress that is made on the Phase 1. Let history not repeat itself. We all got misled by our former secretary and we did not have a clue on how he managed to fool us for such a long time. We are very happy with the progress made on phase 1 but let us live by the laws of the land.

Request all the phase 1 members who are part of this group to check with your lawyers in your friends/relatives circle to see if any flat registrations done by the interim EC members will be legally valid. Let us not trust the interim EC members or even our society lawyer who is paid (monthly consultation charges) by the interim EC members.

Byelaw violations by the current interim EC

 

1.     Term of the EC was from April 2009 to April 2011. The members elected it in early 2009.

2.     Many requestw from the member(s) were sent to the EC before expiry of the term to conduct elections. The byelaw article 5.3.8 was cited. There was no response on this from the then EC, all they said was that the process started.

3.     An EGBM was called on 20^th April 2011 with the agenda for byelaw amendment to extend the term of the EC.

a.     The notice for the EGBM violated article 6.2.2. There was no petition from the members, let alone 1/3^rd members signing for it. Even the AP Society Act 2001 which is attached says that 1/3rd members need to ask for it. Our byelaws clearly mentions it as well. The interim EC has called it an Emergency GBM, and we wonder why when there is no provision for it in the byelaws or the Act.

b.     There was no quorum at the 20^th April 2011 EGBM. The EC citing some excuse sent a poll electronically for the byelaw amendment 5.2.6, once again violating article 6.2.2 since the poll was conducted within two months of the date of the EGBM i.e. 20^th April 2011.

c.      There was no quorum in the voting poll either but the EC declared that the byelaw amendment 5.2.6 was passed.

d.     The byelaw amendment 5.2.6 never went to the Registrar of Societies office until August or September of 2012, about one and a half year later violating the AP Society Registration Act 2001.

4.     Some members of the EC continued illegally after their term expired. There was no Annual GBM conducted in the whole year of 2011. They cited the EGBM of April as the AGBM in their Registrar of Societies filing which is totally against the society byelaws as well as the AP Society Registration Act 2001.

5.     An AGBM was called for in September 2012 with a proper notice of one month. One of the agenda items was to ratify the interim EC from April 2011 with retrospective effect. There was no quorum at the GBM that was conducted on 22^nd September 2012 and a follow up GBM was never called for. None of the items on the agenda for the GBM was voted upon due to lack of quorum.

6.     Lastly, the interim EC has recently conducted a poll starting November 12^th for extension of their term for another two years beginning December 1^st, 2012. The poll was cancelled by the EC citing some technical glitches.

Questions

Is the current interim EC valid at all. Will any documents signed by them including flat registrations hold good legally. The members who are currently on the interim EC are already serving their second term (although without any GBM approval), their term should end in April 2013. None of them are eligible to contest again due to the two term limitation in byelaw article 5.2.2.

We request all of you to spare 10-15 minutes (being holidays now) to go through our byelaw articles that are mentioned in this email.

phase 2 wkg committee member

PS: we thank our other members for providing the copy of our byelaws, etc,.

[Srinivasa Rao]

Hello All,
These are serious findings and would have wide range of repercussions if these are not corrected immediately.
All the EC members have to elected as per the society Act and here I find it is not happening.

I have gone through the byelaws and society Act and find that the interim EC should have conducted Elections in March 2011 as their term was coming to end in April 2012. 
They did not do so and they went on to amend the bye laws without adhering to correct process of amending the byelaws which would not hold good in court of law, more over they are continuing ever since putting the society at risk.


Regards,
Srinivas

--
SEESTAR2 Group is the Group to discuss how to get our hard earned money back. What are the different options we have. We need to look at all the options and decide what's best for us. We need to actively involved in the taking the right decision
No one would look after our interest, it s we , the members of phase II who have to take the initiative and take the best possible road ahead. Hence please do check all mails related to our interest and attend meetings and make our presence felt.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "seestar2" group.
To post to this group, send email to sees...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to seestar2+u...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/seestar2?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Srinivasa Rao]

sorry, there was a Typo in the below mail,

please read the line I have gone through the byelaws and society Act and find that the interim EC should have conducted Elections in March 2011 as their term was coming to end in April 2012. 

as

I have gone through the byelaws and society Act and find that the interim EC should have conducted Elections in March 2011 as their term was coming to end in April 2011.