Can Committee Members Alone Increase Maintenance Charges Without Approval From Other Housing Society Flat Members?
When it comes to residential housing societies, the control and decision-making regarding maintenance charges often rest with the committee. However, the question of whether the committee can increase or set maintenance charges on its own, without the approval of other flat members, can be complex and varies based on the byelaws and specific circumstances.
Committee's Authority According to Byelaws
The Byelaws of a housing society play a crucial role in defining the powers and responsibilities of different bodies within the society. Byelaws are legally binding documents that outline the conduct and decision-making processes for the management and maintenance of the society.
According to Byelaws, the authority to change maintenance charges may either reside with the committee or with the general body of members. In some cases, the committee might have the power to modify maintenance charges within certain predefined limits, but this would typically require ratification by the general body under the society's Byelaws. For instance:
Scenario 1: If the Byelaws grant the committee authority to set maintenance charges without a general body meeting, the committee can proceed to implement the changes based on its discretion. However, if the increase is substantial, it might still be necessary to obtain the approval of a majority of the flat members.
Scenario 2: In other cases, the Byelaws might stipulate that the committee must seek the approval of the general body before any changes in maintenance charges can be implemented. In such scenarios, the committee cannot increase charges unilaterally.
When Do General Body Meetings Matter?
The absence of a body meeting, even when a notice has been issued, does not void the proceedings. If a general body meeting is called for a specific purpose, such as discussing and resolving maintenance-related issues, and some members (though a minority) choose not to attend, the meeting can still proceed under certain conditions. Here’s what usually happens:
When Members Are Absent: If the meeting is successful in reaching a consensus with the majority present, the decision still stands, and it would be valid even if other members did not attend. Members who are not present cannot challenge the decision, as they have not actively participated in the process and no challenges or objections can be raised by them.
Considerable Absence: If the absent members form a significant portion and their collective vote count constitutes a substantial proportion of the total membership, they may have grounds to challenge the decision. They can submit their grievances to the management or even to the courts if they believe the decision was not fair or reasonable.
Reasonableness of the Decision
The outcome of a general body meeting is based on the presence and opinions of the majority. If the increase in maintenance charges is reasonable and supported by the majority of the members present, it becomes binding on the society.
For example, if the committee presents a justified reason for the increase (such as an emergency repair, new management, or increased staff), and a majority of the present members agree, the decision is generally conclusive.
It is also important to note that if the increase is deemed excessive or unreasonable by the people who were absent and they can prove it, they may have grounds to contest the decision legally or through the prescribed channels within the society.
Conclusion
The ability of committee members to increase or set maintenance charges without the approval of other housing society flat members is highly dependent on the specific byelaws and the nature of the decision. While general body meetings are typically recommended for such important decisions, unforeseen circumstances sometimes necessitate unilateral actions by the committee.
Members who are absent can challenge the decision only if their absence is significant and their votes could have altered the outcome. The key is to ensure that the process is fair and reasonable, and decisions are made with the best interests of the society in mind.