• Denial of Rooftop Solar Installation by Housing Society

1. Background

I am an associate member and resident of Flat No. C-306 in Nileta Garden Co-operative Housing Society, Panvel (Maharashtra).

The subject of rooftop solar installation was discussed in the Annual General Meeting (AGM) held on 16 November 2025, wherein the Managing Committee (MC) informed members that they would consult a solar expert before taking a decision.

The AGM minutes were circulated on 21 December 2025, confirming the above.

2. Sequence of Events

09 February 2026: I sent a reminder letter to the MC referring to the AGM discussion and requesting permission for rooftop solar installation.

14 March 2026: The MC rejected my request, stating that the terrace is a common area and cannot be used by individual members.

14 March 2026 (same day): I replied with detailed clarification stating that:

I am not claiming exclusive ownership of terrace

Installation would be safe, removable, and compliant

I cited Bye-law 171, which permits solar installation

16–17 March 2026: The MC asked me to submit technical details.

17 March 2026: I submitted complete technical details covering:

Structural safety

Waterproofing

Electrical safety

Maintenance responsibility

30 March 2026: The society acknowledged receipt of my submission.

06 April 2026: The MC issued a final letter stating that:

Their decision is final

They will not reconsider

No further correspondence will be entertained

3. Key Legal Issue

As per Bye-law 171 of the Model Bye-laws of Co-operative Housing Societies (Maharashtra):

If any member wishes to install a solar energy system, space shall be made available on the terrace, and it shall be binding on the society to provide such space, subject to reasonable conditions.

Despite this provision:

The society has denied permission

No technical deficiency has been pointed out

My submission has not been evaluated

No opportunity for discussion was provided

4. Additional Points

I had also suggested conducting a Special General Meeting (SGM), but no such meeting was arranged.

The society did not appoint any expert despite stating so in AGM.

I had to engage a solar expert at my own expense.

The society’s decision appears arbitrary and not based on technical or legal reasoning.

5. My Queries

Whether the society’s refusal is legally valid in light of Bye-law 171

Whether I can directly approach consumer court for deficiency in service

Whether I should first approach Deputy Registrar under cooperative laws

What would be the most effective legal remedy in this situation

Whether I can claim compensation for delay and harassment

I would appreciate your guidance on the best course of action.

Thank you.
Asked 4 hours ago in Consumer Law

3 answers received in 2 hours.

Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.

3 Answers

1) Bye-law 171 explicitly states that if a member wants to install a solar energy system, it is binding on the society to provide space on the terrace, subject to availability.

 

2While the terrace is a common area, Bye-law 171 acts as a "legitimate diversion" from the usual restrictions on individual use of common areas for the specific purpose of renewable energy.

 

3) : Since you have provided technical details for structural and electrical safety and the society has not pointed out any specific technical deficiencies, a blanket "final" rejection without evaluation is arbitrary

 

4)File a formal complaint with registrar under the Co-operative Societies Act regarding the MC’s failure to implement Bye-law 171. You can use the Sahkar Samvad portal for online grievance redressal.

 

5)You can approach a Consumer Disputes Redressal Forumbecause the society provides services (maintenance) in exchange for fees, and refusing a legitimate facility permitted by law can be considered a "deficiency in service".

 

6)  You can specifically claim compensation for "mental agony" and financial loss (e.g., cost of the expert you engaged) in this forum.

Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
100272 Answers
8190 Consultations

Under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act and the Model Bye-laws, a housing society cannot arbitrarily block green energy initiatives without valid, documented technical grounds.

The by law 171 is a mandatory provision. The society has a statutory obligation to facilitate the installation. The society can impose reasonable conditions viz., ensuring no damage to the roof slab, maintaining access for water tank cleaning, but they cannot use these as a pretext for an outright ban. By declining to accept your request or evaluate your submission, the society (MC) has violated the law in this regard.

The Supreme Court and various State Commissions have held that a member of a Co-operative Housing Society is a "consumer" and the society is a "service provider.".

By Preventing a member from exercising his rights under the bye-laws (especially regarding amenities/infrastructure like solar) constitutes a deficiency.  The consumer redressal commission can award compensation for mental agony and harassment besides passing an order directing the MC to permit you install the desired solar panel as per the conditions, no doubt the entire process will be time consuming. 

At the same time you can even plan to exhaust the remedy available before the Dy. Registrar of cooperative societies for relief and remedy. 

Under Section 23 and Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, the Registrar has the power to intervene when a society acts against its own bye-laws. You should file a formal complaint under Bye-law 174, citing the violation of Bye-law 171. The DR can issue a mandatory direction to the society to grant permission if they find the rejection was arbitrary.

Before that you can send a legal notice through a lawyer by  Registered Post to the Chairman/Secretary stating that you have complied with Bye-law 171, that the society failed to appoint an expert or hold an SGM as requested. You may give  them 7 to 14 days to provide a technical reason for rejection, failing which you will initiate legal proceedings at their personal cost.

Consult an advocate in the local and proceed as suggested 

 

 

 

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
90475 Answers
2520 Consultations

Yes you can approach consumer court as the terrace is common area and not the sole property of MC. 

Prashant Nayak
Advocate, Mumbai
34891 Answers
254 Consultations

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
  Ask a lawyer