Advertisement
The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a petition by a member of a Goregaon (West) housing society challenging the appointment of a developer without following a tender process. The court clarified that the guidelines in the July 2019 government resolution (GR) are directory, not mandatory. The society's majority decision, supervised by an authorized officer, was upheld, reinforcing that procedural lapses alone do not invalidate redevelopment unless they violate statutory requirements. The ruling also emphasized cluster redevelopment initiatives and the legal autonomy of housing societies in managing redevelopment projects.
The Bombay High Court dismissed a petition questioning the appointment of a developer by Ramanuj Cooperative Housing Society Limited (CHSL) in Goregaon (West) for its redevelopment project. The petitioner, Devendra Jain, had challenged the society's decision to issue a letter of intent to Cunni Realty and Developer Pvt Ltd without following a tender process as outlined in the July 2019 government resolution (GR). Jain argued that the society bypassed Section 79(A) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, which empowers the government to issue directives in the public interest, and requested the court to annul the entire redevelopment process. Advertisement
The court clarified that the 2019 GR guidelines are directory, not mandatory, meaning that while they provide guidance for a fair and transparent redevelopment process, deviations do not automatically amount to a legal violation unless they contravene statutory requirements or the objectives of the directives. The judges cited earlier decisions, including a 2016 ruling on a similar 2009 policy, emphasizing that guidelines under Section 79(A) serve to streamline procedures but are not obligatory.
The society's legal team explained that the organization, established in 1972, had incurred significant repair expenses over time. In a special general body meeting held in March 2023, 77 out of 83 members attended, and 76 members approved the appointment of Cunni Realty, with only Jain dissenting. The meeting was supervised by an authorized officer, and based on the report, the deputy registrar granted a no-objection certificate. Other interested developers did not submit formal offers, and the court noted that the dissent of a single member cannot obstruct a decision made by a majority.
The petition highlighted concerns that the society bypassed the tender process; however, the court upheld the society's decision, reinforcing that majority consent, proper supervision, and compliance with the law are sufficient for the legitimacy of redevelopment initiatives. The appointment of Cunni Realty was also part of a broader cluster redevelopment initiative involving three other housing societies, reflecting the growing trend of coordinated redevelopment projects in Mumbai.
5th Jun, 2025
25th May, 2023
11th May, 2023
27th Apr, 2023
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
