Crossing Republik Societies: Fw: [ParamountGroup] Fwd: FOOD FOR THOUGHT

Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel

From: Prem Goel <peeceegoel@gmail.com>

Sender: ParamountGroup@yahoogroups.com

Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:46:59 +0530

To: paramountgroup<ParamountGroup@yahoogroups.com>

ReplyTo: ParamountGroup@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [ParamountGroup] Fwd: FOOD FOR THOUGHT

FYI

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Prem Goel <peeceegoel@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: FOOD FOR THOUGHT
To: PK Mathur <mathur.prabhat@gmail.com>
Cc: Surinder Bhalla <spb.2204@yahoo.com>, "singhjasbir15@yahoo.co.in" <singhjasbir15@yahoo.co.in>, "subhashbakshi@gmail.com" <subhashbakshi@gmail.com>, PSRWA Ghaziabad <nas47in@rediffmail.com>, "a.chauhan75@rediffmail.com" <a.chauhan75@rediffmail.com>, "aga.amanaggarwal@gmail.com" <aga.amanaggarwal@gmail.com>, "ajjubisht@gmail.com" <ajjubisht@gmail.com>, "ameteshkhare@gmail.com" <ameteshkhare@gmail.com>, "augustine46@gmail.com" <augustine46@gmail.com>, "cc: guptavinay75@gmail.com" <guptavinay75@gmail.com>, "contact@psrwa.org" <contact@psrwa.org>, "dgfcs1 ." <dgfcs1@sify.com>, "dhrjkumar@gmail.com" <dhrjkumar@gmail.com>, "ganesh.babu@infotech-enterprises.com" <ganesh.babu@infotech-enterprises.com>, "handaji@gmail.com" <handaji@gmail.com>, "itsmithunhere@rediffmail.com" <itsmithunhere@rediffmail.com>, "livemercado@gmail.com" <livemercado@gmail.com>, "maneesh.pri@gmail.com" <maneesh.pri@gmail.com>, Manoj kumar <manojpathak1980@yahoo.in>, "mayankseth_75@yahoo.com" <mayankseth_75@yahoo.com>, "mehrasm@gmail.com" <mehrasm@gmail.com>, "meinul.haque@gmail.com" <meinul.haque@gmail.com>, "mkambast@gmail.com" <mkambast@gmail.com>, "mrsmanjugolchha@gmail.com" <mrsmanjugolchha@gmail.com>, "naveenthakurmca@gmail.com" <naveenthakurmca@gmail.com>, Nitin Rai <nitin_gail@yahoo.co.in>, "nitin.agrawal@nechclst.in" <nitin.agrawal@nechclst.in>, "prashant.procall@gmail.com" <prashant.procall@gmail.com>, "president@psrwa.org" <president@psrwa.org>, "rahul28may@hotmail.com" <rahul28may@hotmail.com>, "rajesh@eagle.in" <rajesh@eagle.in>, "rakeshgupta@mssl.motherson.com" <rakeshgupta@mssl.motherson.com>, "rohit@vista-osi-group.com" <rohit@vista-osi-group.com>, sajid akhter <sajid_rubaish@yahoo.com>, "saurabh0611@gmail.com" <saurabh0611@gmail.com>, "shalinsaxena@live.com" <shalinsaxena@live.com>, "shivencomputers@gmail.com" <shivencomputers@gmail.com>, "singh.uttam@yahoo.com" <singh.uttam@yahoo.com>, "srseelam2k6@gmail.com" <srseelam2k6@gmail.com>, Sumit Sood <sumitsoods@gmail.com>, "sunilvish@rediffmail.com" <sunilvish@rediffmail.com>, "vikaschauhan40@gmail.com" <vikaschauhan40@gmail.com>, "vishal@braintechnosys.com" <vishal@braintechnosys.com>

Respected Bhallaji & Mathurji,

I totally agree with you and the apprehensions raised by Mathurji since they do not understand and also do not want to understand the basics hence the apprehensions raised by Mathurji need consideration. There is a proverb little knowledge is dangerous knowledge hold good in the present case. Now coming to the specific issues raised by the Bhallaji in his mail I would say:

1. That the usual attendance in the meetings so far is around 40-50 members thus the attendance in the meeting held on 2/12/12 seems to be manipulated. To clarify my point they have stated in the quorum 85 members present including 30 Registered Members. who are these Registered Members & Members. I have asked again and again to clarify the term Registered Members but they have not clarified. Needless to mention the remaining 55 Members are not the Members of the Association and thus legally are not allowed to attend and participate in discussion and voting by allowing them to attend and vote not only the quorum has been manipulated but also the legality of the proceedings have been affected.

2. There is no doubt the BYE LAWS of the Association be made legally effective and strong and this should be done by adopting the due process of law and not in the manner the amendments have been intoduced thru the so called GBM otherwise it will only strengthen the hands of the builder and this is something we are pursuing since long but as I have said little knowledge is dangerous knowledge, in the interest of the Association and the Residents the Requisition dt. 4/10/11/12 must be given due consideration. Now Mathurji has also endorsed what the residents have demanded in the Requisition.

3. As far as going to the Consumer Forum for reddressal of Grievance against the builder is not a viable solution considering the pendancy of around 70,000 odd cases before the Forum. Further I observe during the hearing before the National Commission that almost every case decided by the Consumer Forum is being appealed by the aggrieved party before the National Commission ofcurse after exhausting the channel of State Commission. Needless to say this will take app. 10-15 years time. Moreover the Consumer Forum usually entertain simple cases and not the complex cases like this. Certainly going to this forum will only strengthen the hands of the builder.

Any contrary view to this will be very much appreciated.

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 9:22 AM, PK Mathur <mathur.prabhat@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Bhallaji,

Ironically, your mail to the President, PSRWA has come exactly at the time at which we were expecting a dialogue with executives of PSRWA as discussed amongst us on 26.01.2013. The cold response of the so-called executives to the sincerely proposed dialogue really saddens me and leaves with a sense of helplessness.

I do agree with every bit of what you have written but I am afraid on two counts:

1. This may embolden the executives and harden their misplaced attitude by feeling vindicated.

2. Spelling out a detailed account of the shortcomings in the existing bye-laws at this stage may become a tool in their hands to awfully draft sketchy amendments on their own and consider themselves to be on top of the world.

As has been our view so far, a group of well informed and seasoned residents should only draft the amended bye-laws. Discussing any proposed sketchy amendments in the GBM (to get approval) will be a situation of fish market scenario we have been trying to avoid all these days. Any worthwhile outcome will be a distant possibility.

This is my apprehension and I wish it proves wrong. In any case, I am sure you will take it in right earnest.

Regards,
PK Mathur

On 29 January 2013 18:20, Surinder Bhalla <spb.2204@yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear Mr. President PSRWA;

While going through MOM dated 18^th January 2013 of Special GBM held on 6^th January 2013, it was observed it had thin attendance, as compared to Special GBM held on 6^th December 2012, presumably as 6^th January 2013 was earlier fixed to hold elections of New Executive Committee of PSRWA, which were later deferred for 2 (two) weeks due to winter vacations, reportedly on request of many residents. It goes without saying when 6^th instant was not suited for holding elections, how same could qualify for holding Special GBM and could have been avoided;

Further, perusal of MOM dated 6^th instant also indicate that present Executive Committee of erstwhile MAPS and now PSRWA, which has so far been leading Builder to garden path, in return to small favors made by him, finds a stalemate with same Builder, wherein he is not prepared to even meet them. Two reasons come to my mind, firstly, having successfully accomplished his mission of commercialization of complex, he does not need your help anymore and secondly, he knows that Bye-Laws of PSRWA as registered, which not only lack clarity but are sketchy besides don't define various heads properly, can't stand in his way. Furthermore, to counter all this, various measures are said to have been discussed in captioned Special GBM, which include filing case against PFML and Builder before Consumer Protection Forum, holding of mass demonstrations and some signature campaign;

In-view of above and in fitness of things, we must draft proper Bye-Laws of PSRWA first, clearly defining important heads, like - (i) Classes of Members; (ii) Eligibility of Membership; (iii) Conditions of Membership; (iv) Rights, Responsibilities and Liabilities of Members; (v) Sub Letting of Flats; (vi) Incorporation, Duties and Powers of Society; (vii) Election Rules; (viii) Holding of AGBM & SGBM; (ix) Management of Affairs of Society; (x) Service of Notice of Meetings, Communication of Resolutions or Decisions; (xi) Redressal of Complaints; (xii) Issuance of Share Certificates to Members; (xiii) Registration of Nominations by Flat Owners and (xiv) Finalization of various Forms, Applications and Formats. Then get them approved in Special GBM of all Residents besides obtain approval of Competent Authority. And thereafter, all issues should be taken-up with PFML as well as Builder, citing relevant Bye-Laws of PSRWA, which shall certainly hold weight and can't be over looked by either of the two, besides can be effectively used in subsequent proceedings before Consumer Forum and/or Court of Law, as the case may be. Otherwise also, it is essential that all internal remedies are exhausted first in a proper way, lest our application | sit is held premature, resulting in avoidable waste of time;

Last but not the least, there is also felt need to change erroneous perception carried by few, to quote - 'When we are united no law can harm us', unquote, it should be - 'If we are with side of law no harm can be caused to us';

CHOICE IS ENTIRELY YOURS PLEASE;

Regards

S.P. Bhalla