The district consumer forum recently directed a Goregaon cooperative housing society to probe into a member’s complaints regarding unhygienic conditions and a lack of proper waste management system.
The district consumer forum recently directed a Goregaon cooperative housing society to probe into a member’s complaints regarding unhygienic conditions and a lack of proper waste management system in the premises.
A division bench comprising president JL Deshpande and member Deepa Bidnuskar, citing sections 156 and 157 of the Co-operative Society’s Act, ordered the probe on the grounds that it was the responsibility of the society to maintain its property.
As per section 156, it is the responsibility of the committee to maintain the property of the society in good condition at all times.
Similarly, section 157 states that the secretary of the society, on receipt of any complaints about the maintenance of the property of the society from any member of the society or on his own motion, has to inspect the property of the society from time to time and make a report to the committee, stating a need for repairs, if any.
The committee then has to consider the report made by the secretary, and the society will decide as to which of the repairs should be carried out.
The forum was hearing a complaint made by P Pratpawar, of the Dushsagar Cooperative Housing Society, Goregaon. As per his complaint, the society has deliberately been giving him a rough deal. The society, he alleged, did not clean the compound near his house, or maintain a waste water management system even after repeated requests. Further, he claimed that the unhygienic conditions around his house have resulted in rat holes, through which even snakes have entered his house.
Pratpawar claims he made several complaints to the society, even to the deputy registrar, co-operative societies, and received no response. He therefore moved the forum. The society denied the allegations that the complainant had approached several authorities.
However, the forum said the society had indeed not provided service to the complainant, and thus directed it to act on the order made by it within eight weeks.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}