Pune: Housing societies undergoing redevelopment have welcomed greater transparency, competitive bidding and safeguards for members under the state’s new framework, but raised concerns over mandatory procedures, increased scrutiny by the co-operation department and possible action against elected managing committee members for procedural lapses.Members told TOI that while safeguards were necessary, the elaborate process could delay projects, particularly those already underway under the earlier rules. They sought clarity on how the Sept 30 govt resolution (GR) would apply to projects where some stages have already been completed. “This needs to be spelt out, or else it would put managing committee members at risk,” said a member of a 40-year-old housing society in the city.Issued under Section 79A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, the GR replaces the July 4, 2019 framework and subsequent circulars. It prescribes procedures covering the redevelopment decision, appointment of an architect or project management consultant (PMC), project report, tendering, developer selection, agreements, transit accommodation and allotment of premises. The concern stems from the GR linking contravention of its directions, in appropriate cases, to action under Sections 79A(3) and 78A of the Act. Members said redevelopment involves complex technical, legal and commercial decisions and the possibility of action could make committee members reluctant to take decisions or expose them to disputes over procedural lapses.The issue also comes against the backdrop of Bombay High Court’s Oct 2025 ruling in Baltazar Fernandes v Deputy Registrar of Societies. The court held that General Body is the supreme authority in matters concerning a society and that redevelopment falls within its domain. It also held that Registrar has no authority to grant an NOC for redevelopment.Commissioner for co-operation subsequently directed Registrars in Nov 2025 not to issue redevelopment NOCs. HC reiterated the position in judgments in Jan and March 2026, said a legal expert. Members from societies that are planning for redevelopment said the new framework should therefore ensure procedural compliance without turning supervision into administrative control.Among the guidelines, the GR provides several safeguards, including inspection of redevelopment records, registered Permanent Alternative Accommodation Agreements, transit arrangements and project-completion timelines. General Body is given a larger role, with the draft tender, redevelopment proposal and other key matters to be placed before members. Notices, minutes, written consents, comparative statements and video recordings are also prescribed.Members unable to attend physically because they are abroad, seriously ill, disabled or otherwise prevented by unavoidable circumstances can participate remotely. However, at least 51% of the total membership must remain physically present. “This is a good move as it would help speed up redevelopment,” added Megha Sharma, a senior citizen and society committee member. Under the new guidelines, the architect/PMC must assess the property’s development potential under the applicable DCPR/UDCPR and prepare scheme-wise reports setting out comparative benefits. Competitive bidding is prescribed, with ordinarily at least three offers contemplated.For developer selection, at least 51% of the total membership must provide the prescribed written consent or approval. If at least one-fifth of members demand it in writing, the selection can be conducted through secret ballot.“We want transparency and accountability, but the General Body must continue to have the final say in redevelopment of its own property. The process should not become another clearance mechanism,” members said.
