Writ Petition 19835 of 2002 disposed in 2008

Will Telangana Govt auction Community Halls ?

Y. Babji, Past President

Yes. It is going to happen as per media reports. Read this news.

https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/telangana/2025/Jun/08/telangana-to-auction-rajiv-swagruha-and-housing-board-properties-to-raise-funds-for-development.

If the properties in question include SR Nagar Community Hall too, read my blog written here on 23rd July 2010 about a Writ filed in AP High Court that stalled the action of AP Housing Board to auction it. 

Writ Petition 19835 of 2002 disposed in 2008

WP No.19835 of 2002 between the petitioner Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar Welfare Association and the respondent AP Housing Board is disposed by an order dated 28th August 2008.

The writ was filed by the Association questioning the proposed action of the Housing Board in auctioning the Community Hall to private people on rental basis for a period of 5 years on the ground that "community hall was constructed for the benefit of the residents of SR Nagar as when the layout has been made, the Housing Board collected developmental charges for providing civic amenities like roads, play grounds, water, drainage, electricity etc and also to develop the said community hall to meet the needs of the colony people".

While disposing the writ, Hon'ble Justice V Eswaraiah, observed that "it is just and proper to settle the terms and conditions for making use of the said community hall even by the auction purchaser and for that reason, it is just and proper for the respondent Housing Board to give notice to the petitioner Association before issuing auction notification.  Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of keeping it open for the respondents to auction the community hall on rental basis.  However, the respondents are directed to issue notice to the petitioner before issuing auction notification and take its suggestion also into account". 

The Housing Board took 2 years to communicate the order of the High Court.  Now the EE, North Division of APHB vide his letter dtd 20-7-2010 asking for the suggestions of the Association.

Members of the Welfare Association are wondering why the present Executive Committee that was elected in Jan 2021 is not conducting AGMs, not rendering annual accounts, not maintaining registers and books that will have to be maintained by a Residential Welfare Association as per byelaws. Executive Committee meetings are not taking place and even if conducted, no communication of minutes thereof. An official whatsapp group created for a two way communication is kept closed for members and is in Admins Only mode since 2021. 

If this is the opaque nature of a 'body of individuals' in a democratic society, its functioning as per byelaws or otherwise, is left to the imagination of its own members as well as residents of the Colony, commented a senior member, vehemently.  

Time to Act for the Association to gather old records, minutes of meetings, have an emergency general body meeting, adopt a resolution and approach all the concerned officials and peoples representatives for a solution. 

RWAs - Majority are Undemocratic and Opaque

A Resident Welfare Association (RWA) is a non-governmental organization that represents the interests of the residents of a community or society. RWAs are created to manage the welfare of a community, including ensuring a safe, peaceful, and well-maintained living environment.

These are responsible for managing common areas, facilitating communication among residents, liaising with external authorities, addressing community matters, such as maintenance and social events, overseeing expenses and ensuring they are used for the residents' well-being and development. RWAs are legal entities with their own rights and legal duties. They are set up under the Societies Registration Act of 1860 or State Acts. RWAs will have the Office Bearers who play various roles, such as President, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer, Executive Members as per the approved byelaws

Criticisms towards Residential Welfare Associations often center around their perceived arbitrary rule enforcement, discriminatory practices, lack of transparency, potential corruption and overreach into residents' personal lives, sometimes imposing rules that are seen as overly controlling and discriminatory based on various factors. 

Key criticisms are arbitrary rules and enforcement: RWAs are often accused of creating and enforcing rules based on personal biases or whims, rather than established guidelines, leading to unfair treatment of residents depending on the governing body's interpretation.

Discrimination based on personal characteristics: Some RWAs have been known to bar tenants based on factors like marital status, gender, or even religion, creating discriminatory practices within the community.

Lack of transparency and accountability: The decision-making process within RWAs can be opaque, with residents often not having access to detailed information regarding financial management or rule implementation, leading to concerns about potential corruption.

Moral policing and overreach: Some RWAs tend to interfere excessively in residents' personal lives, dictating social behavior and imposing restrictions on activities that are not necessarily detrimental to the community.

Power dynamics and intimidation: Residents may feel pressured to comply with RWA demands due to the power they hold over basic amenities and services within the community, leading to a fear of retaliation for voicing dissent.

Poor handling of disputes: Internal conflicts within a community can be poorly managed by RWAs, leading to escalation of issues and lack of resolution for residents with grievances.

Exclusion of tenants: In some cases, RWAs prioritize the concerns of property owners over tenants, leaving renters with limited voice in decision-making processes and potentially facing unfair treatment.

Examples of criticism against RWAs: Unequal treatment of residents i.e. favoring certain residents or groups within the community over others in decision-making or enforcement of rule and most importantly not following the approved byelaws in terms of convening EC Meetings and AGMs vis a vis conducting Elections and mandatory reporting to the Registrar concerned as required under law.

- Y Babji, Past President of SRNWA

Hyderabad / 9th December 2020

The now redundant Executive Committee of SR Nagar Welfare Association which continued for 4 years 6 months is likely to go for elections on 24th January 2021.

Learnt that the EC met on 8-12-2020 and decided to hold AGM with Elections on 24-1-2021 though the orders of Government was to hold AGMs of different entities before 31st December 2020 either physically or virtually or on a combination of both.

Members of the Association accuse the Office Bearers for being non-responsive and opaque in their functioning. Residents expect that this time Youth takes up the responsibility of the Association duly dispensing with those who enjoyed power and positions for decades. 

Hyderabad/20th June 2020

SR Nagar Residents' Welfare Association gets on with a time-barred Executive Committee.

Since 4 years, there are no elections to the Executive Committee of Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar Welfare Association.

As per the constitution of the Association, June is the month during which General Body meeting will have to be conducted every year and Elections ought to be held once in two years. But the present Committee chose to continue unauthorized without AGM and Elections in the guise of Corona lockdown, though there is a provision to convene Virtual AGMs.  

New Managing Committee for 2012-14

Prof. J S Babu Rao & Advocate Mallikarjuna Rao and all their associates as a panel have swept the polls conducted at the AGM held on 17-6-2012 defeating CB Richard & K Sarada and their followers. It was an unprecedented turn out at the AGM this year despite rain and humidity. Started at 3 pm, the poll process went on upto 8.30 pm.

Here, they are, victorious -

President
Prof J S Babu Rao

Vice Presidents
SV Rama Bhadra Raju
K Hanumantha Rao
K Indra Reddy

Secretary
Advocate K V Mallikarjuna Rao

Joint Secretaries
T Srikanth
S Anji Reddy
V Viveknath

Treasurer
T Pentaiah

Joint Treasurer
K. Jacob

& 13 more EC members


The outgoing Managing Committee proposed meaningless amendments to the bye-laws much to the disappointment of Senior Citizens, Members serving in Govt Departments & Women who are active in other Associations etc. Those proposed amendments were not authorized by the Executive Committee, either. The lesson to be learnt is "Never disrespect senior citizens and elders".

SR Nagar, the longest busbay of Hyderabad

Kaveri travels multi-axled Volvo bus was caught in fire on the Ameerpet main road on the night of Sunday (10-6-2012). After noticing the smoke, passengers jumped out of the the bus and fled. Flames spread to the entire bus and even before the arrival of fire tenders the bus was completely destroyed. The incident took place when the bus belonging to Kaveri Tours and Travels, was going towards Central Bus Station at Gowliguda from BHEL.

Five fire tenders from Film Nagar, Sanathnagar, Secunderabad, Gowliguda and Langar Houz, besides a snorkel, rushed to the spot to extinguish the flames. Police confirmed that there were no casualties in the incident. The apparent cause is sparks in the battery chambers near the luggage boot of the bus. Another version is the bus was parked on a heap of ash that was gathered from a computer shop of a building that caught fire in the afternoon, the same day.

The Bombay highway that passes between SR Nagar and Vengal Rao Nagar has become the longest busbay of Hyderabad city causing pollution and posing threat to life.

Confusion clouds over amendments

 - Y. Babji, Past President  

The Executive Committee of the Association met on 9th June 2012 in  a state of utter confusion over the amendments to the byelaws of the Association. With just one week left for the AGM, nothing is clear. Due to irrational amendments proposed to be adopted, majority of the members got irritated mainly for the reasons namely-

(1) down-sizing the number of vacancies to the position of the Vice Presidents and the Joint Secretaries, but increasing the strength of Joint Treasurers 

(2) unprecedented and prohibitive imposition of cash deposit for each and every nomination &

(3) restricting the entry of Senior Citizens, those working for Govt and local bodies, representatives of women associations etc into the Managing Committee of the Association.

Criticism is that these proposed amendments were never discussed and adopted in any of the earlier EC meetings, but proposed unilaterally, without even consulting the seniors.

The meeting witnessed chaos and disorder when members left the meeting, disgusted, abruptly.