Hi Sir Recently, we conducted a GBM and a few owners put forward their grievances against a rental/sale agency for malpractices and poaching of clients. Upon taking voting, the majority was in favour of blacklisting the aforesaid firm. There were 4 employees who used to deal with owners before firm got blacklisted. On the basis of GBM minutes, the MC issued notice to all owners that the firm and it's 4 employees will not be allowed in side the society. There is a section of owners who still want the firm employees to enter society by saying that they don't work for the aforesaid firm anymore and they should be allowed being their guests. Also, this section of owners feel that it is their fundamental right to deal individually with any person including any of these four employees of blacklisted firm. What should be the stand of MC here? What is legal validity of a general body banning a firm as well as it's employees by name? Are the owners entitled to deal with such barred people in their individual capacity at their own risk? As it seems, if owners are legally allowed, similar incident of malpractices & poaching etc are likely to happen again since that was the very basis of their blacklisting. Looking forward for legal position please! Regards
First answer received in 10 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
What rights a society MC has to stop ex-employees of a blacklisted firm to stop any owner avail service from them? Any MC is perceived to be a decision maker in matters of common area maintenance. Does MC or a GBM has rights to take decision on even blacklisting firms or individuals?
1) general body has no business in deciding brokers that flat owners can deal with
2) it is right of flat owners to deal with brokers they deem fit
3) you are only concerned with receipt of transfer charges from flat owners who sell the flat and whether all the papers are in order or not
They can't involve such black listed firms. You can complaint against the MC before dy registrar
The blacklisting of the firm was taken for a common cause and not for any individual grievance.
Similarly none of the owner can be restricted from allowing their guests into their house, may be the guest may be a part of the black listed company.
The society can restrict itself from deploying the services of the black listed firm for all the common and maintenance services as per the decision taken on a resolution passed in a general body meeting.
The association cannot interfere in the individual owner's rights to live in their own flats.
Instead of taking it legally you can convince the reluctant owners to cooperate with the association and other members of the society in the interest of society.
MC cannot dictate terms to the owners who are utilizing the services of the such employees unless the blacklisted company's employees indulge in activities that would hamper or cause damage to other member of the society or to the society itself.
It would be considered as an act of depriving or interfering into the rights of an individual and would become a more sensitive issue.
Until and unless the said employees are found to be detrimental to the interest of the society, the society cannot stop the employees from serving the owners who engage these employees privately.
.
AGM cannot stop ex employees of firm from meeting any flat owners of society
it would be difficult for AGM to enforce decisions regarding black listing of firms
Day-to-day management of the common areas fall under the purview of the MC in any society. Usually, the bylaws empower the MC for engaging and terminating the services of any service provider for maintaining common areas, which the MC can suitably decide by means of a resolution and it should form part of the minutes of that MC meeting. If any dispute continues unresolved, decision has to be taken at the GBM by passing a suitable resolution.
