Bombay High Court Restores Chembur Society Panel in Redevelopment Disqualification Case
Judgment Reinforces Due Process, Limits Registrar’s Powers Under MCS Act Section 79A
In a ruling with wide implications for Mumbai’s housing societies, the Bombay High Court has quashed the disqualification of a managing committee that had been penalized by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies for alleged lapses in redevelopment procedure. The judgment, delivered on June 9, 2025, in Harish Arora & Ors. vs. Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies & Ors. (Writ Petition No. 3433 of 2025), restores the society’s elected panel and clarifies the limits of Section 79A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (MCS) Act.
The Case: Procedure vs. Practicality
The petitioners, led by Harish Arora, were elected to the managing committee of a 45-year-old Chembur housing society in September 2024. Their predecessors had initiated redevelopment after a MHADA audit rated the building as C-1 (dangerous). The new committee reissued tenders in October 2024 but allegedly violated certain redevelopment norms — including an 18-day notice period instead of the mandated 21, incomplete financial disclosures, and absence of an independent architect’s review.
On January 1, 2025, the Deputy Registrar disqualified the entire committee under Section 79A(3), alleging non-compliance with the 2009 and 2019 redevelopment directives. A status quo order in February 2025 further froze all tender activities, prompting the committee to approach the High Court.
Court’s Findings
The Bombay High Court held that Section 79A empowers the Registrar to issue directives and ensure compliance but not to impose punitive disqualification without due hearing. Citing Kamgar Swa Sadan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra (2025 SCC OnLine Bom 1245), the Bench emphasized that procedural fairness and natural justice under Article 14 must precede any adverse action.
The Court observed that the lapses cited — such as a shortened notice period — were technical rather than substantive, given that 65% of members had already consented and tenders were RERA-registered. It found the Registrar’s intervention disproportionate, noting that “public interest in swift redevelopment outweighs bureaucratic rigidity.”
The interim status quo order, too, was ruled arbitrary, since no irreparable harm was demonstrated despite developer affidavits ensuring transparency.
Directions
- The January 2025 disqualification and February 2025 status quo were set aside.
- The committee was reinstated with authority to proceed under independent monitoring.
- The Registrar must hold a compliance hearing within 30 days and appoint a court observer for oversight.
- The society was ordered to hold a fresh general body vote within 60 days, ensuring 2019 guideline compliance.
- ₹75,000 costs were imposed on the Registrar for “hasty and excessive intervention.”
Broader Significance
This ruling safeguards democratically elected committees from arbitrary administrative action, while reinforcing transparency and accountability in developer selection. By limiting the Registrar’s powers to advisory oversight rather than punitive measures, the court has reaffirmed the balance between redevelopment governance and procedural equity.
Legal analysts note that the decision will benefit over 3,000 Mumbai societies navigating similar compliance challenges, ensuring that redevelopment momentum is not derailed by technicalities or bureaucratic overreach.
