_1771224636.webp)
Table of Content
▲
In a significant ruling reinforcing the rights of flat owners, the Bombay High Court has held that housing societies cannot expel members for questioning management or raising complaints before authorities. The judgment makes it clear that dissent and lawful grievances cannot be treated as misconduct.
The decision came in a case involving a cooperative housing society in Pune, where five members were removed after repeatedly questioning the managing committee’s decisions and approaching government bodies.
Background of the Dispute
The matter arose from a cooperative housing society located in Kothrud, Pune. Between 2017 and 2021, five individuals purchased flats and became registered members of the society. Over time, they began expressing concerns regarding certain administrative and financial decisions taken by the managing committee.
The members approached officials from the Cooperative Department and the municipal authorities with formal complaints. Following this, a section of society members alleged that these complaints were defamatory and harmful to the society’s reputation.
In October 2023, the general body passed a resolution to terminate the memberships of the five individuals. The expulsion was later approved by the sub-registrar in June 2024. After their appeals before cooperative authorities were rejected, the members moved the High Court.
The central issue before the court was whether housing societies cannot expel members for questioning management, especially when the complaints are pursued through lawful channels.
What the High Court Observed
Justice Amit Borkar, while delivering the verdict, emphasized that expulsion from a cooperative housing society is a drastic measure with far-reaching consequences.
The court reiterated that housing societies cannot expel members for questioning management when those questions relate to governance, financial decisions, or legal rights. According to the judgment, cooperative housing societies function on collective participation and mutual accountability.
The court observed that members contribute funds, elect representatives, and are directly affected by decisions taken by the managing committee. Therefore, raising objections or filing complaints cannot automatically be treated as misconduct.
Also Read: Noida Aqua Line Metro Extension Gets Nod: What It Means for Realty
When Can Expulsion Be Justified?
The High Court clarified that expulsion is permissible only in serious cases where a member’s actions genuinely harm the society’s functioning. Examples may include:
- Fraud or financial misappropriation
- Violent or threatening behaviour
- Persistent actions that disrupt essential operations
However, the court stressed that housing societies cannot expel members for questioning management or for pursuing lawful remedies before courts and statutory authorities.
Treating grievances as indiscipline would discourage transparency and weaken democratic functioning within cooperative bodies.
Strengthening Flat Owners’ Rights
The judgment reinforces the principle that cooperative housing societies are democratic institutions. Members are stakeholders, not passive occupants. By ruling that housing societies cannot expel members for questioning management, the High Court has strengthened safeguards against arbitrary decisions.
The court also warned that allowing managing committees to silence dissent would undermine accountability and defeat the purpose of cooperative housing governance.
Expulsion, the judge noted, must remain an exceptional measure rather than a tool to suppress disagreement.
Final Verdict
The High Court ultimately set aside the expulsion orders and restored the memberships of the five flat owners. The ruling sends a broader message across Maharashtra and potentially other states that housing societies cannot expel members for questioning management or filing legitimate complaints.
For housing societies, the judgment serves as a reminder to handle internal disputes within the framework of law and cooperative principles.
Broader Implications
This ruling is likely to influence how cooperative housing societies across urban centres handle member grievances. It underscores that transparency, participation, and accountability are foundational to cooperative structures.
By affirming that housing societies cannot expel members for questioning management, the High Court has drawn a clear line between genuine misconduct and lawful dissent.
The decision not only restores the rights of the affected members but also strengthens democratic governance within residential communities.
_1771224636.webp)
_1770964981.webp)
Ans 1. No. The Bombay High Court has ruled that housing societies cannot expel members for questioning management or filing complaints through lawful channels. Dissent and legitimate grievances cannot be treated as misconduct.
Ans 2. The case involved five flat owners in a Pune cooperative housing society who were expelled after raising concerns about management and approaching government authorities. The High Court restored their memberships, ruling the expulsion unlawful.
Ans 3. Expulsion is only permissible in serious cases such as: Fraud or financial misappropriation Violent or threatening behaviour Persistent disruption of essential society operations Raising legitimate concerns or filing complaints does not justify expulsion.
Ans 4. The court emphasized that cooperative housing societies are democratic institutions. Members contribute funds, elect representatives, and are stakeholders; thus, lawful dissent and grievances must be respected.
Ans 5. It strengthens safeguards against arbitrary actions by managing committees, ensuring that members cannot be removed simply for questioning management or pursuing statutory remedies.
Ans 6. Societies must handle internal disputes transparently and lawfully. The decision encourages democratic participation, accountability, and proper grievance redressal in cooperative housing bodies.
Ans 7. While the case originated in Maharashtra, the judgment sets a legal precedent that may influence cooperative societies in other states, reinforcing members’ rights nationwide.
Ans 8. Societies should address disputes through proper channels, maintain transparency, avoid arbitrary decisions, and ensure that expulsion is used only in extreme, justified cases.
Ans 9. Yes. Members have the legal right to approach statutory authorities or courts for grievances without fear of expulsion, as affirmed by the Bombay High Court.
Ans 10. The ruling warns committees against using expulsion to suppress dissent and reinforces that lawful questioning and complaints are part of democratic governance within housing societies.