Bombay High Court Dismisses Plea On Housing Society Water Dispute
Court Rules Maintenance Default, Not Human Rights Violation, Behind Disconnection
The Bombay High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by Vilas Gopal Dongare, a flat owner from Kalyan-Dombivli, who alleged violation of his human rights after his housing society disconnected his water supply over unpaid maintenance charges.
The ruling, delivered on June 12, 2024 by Justice Avinash G. Gharote, upheld the order of the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission, which had earlier rejected Dongare’s complaint.
Background Of The Dispute
The conflict originated from a dispute over maintenance fees between Dongare and his cooperative housing society. The society initiated proceedings under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, securing a Recovery Certificate for unpaid dues.
Dongare challenged this Recovery Certificate in appeal, but the appeal was dismissed. In parallel, he approached the Human Rights Commission, alleging that the water supply cut-off and a water tank construction issue violated his fundamental rights. On February 5, 2020, the Commission rejected his plea.
The Writ Petition
Unwilling to accept the Commission’s order, Dongare filed Writ Petition No. 4116 of 2022 before the High Court. He argued that the water disconnection amounted to a breach of his basic human rights.
The Court, however, noted that Dongare had failed to clear his legally due maintenance charges. It held that the water disconnection was a direct consequence of non-payment, not a human rights violation.
High Court’s Findings
In dismissing the petition, the High Court stated that the Commission’s decision was correct and found no merit in the petitioner’s claims. The judge also noted that Dongare had already filed a separate writ petition against the dismissal of his appeal on the Recovery Certificate, where he deposited 50% of the disputed amount. That matter remains pending.
Implications
The judgment underscores that housing society disputes over maintenance are civil and statutory matters, and non-payment can legitimately lead to action, including water supply restrictions. Courts are unlikely to frame such disputes as human rights violations when statutory remedies exist.
