Noida: Allahabad High Court gives the green signal to Sec 50 RWA
Welcome To CitySpidey


Noida: Allahabad High Court gives the green signal to Sec 50 RWA

Court overrules SDM’s order to annul RWA election and instructs authorities to let the RWA function until further directions from the court.

Noida: Allahabad High Court gives the green signal to Sec 50 RWA

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday instructed authorities to let the RWA of Sector 50, Noida, function smoothly till it gives further directions. On June 27, the elections were annulled by the sub-divisional magistrate (SDM) over allegations of bogus and proxy voting.

The court order said, "Clause 5 of the by-laws specifically permits a member of the association or his authorised person/dependent from each flat to cast their vote and therefore, the prescribed authority has erred in holding that no proxy vote could be casted. It is stated that only authorised persons had participated and the basis to set aside the election is bad in law".

The high court also observed, "Till the next date of listing, effect and operation of the order of the prescribed authority dated June 27, 2016, shall be kept in abeyance. It is further provided that the authorities shall not interfere with the functioning of the petitioners on the basis of the order of the prescribed authority".

Following complaints of bogus and proxy voting, the SDM had frozen the bank account of the RWA and had derecognised the resident body, saying it had been formed illegally. He had further added that fresh elections would to be held within a month.

Manish Sisodiya, a resident of the sector, had lodged a complaint with the deputy registrar of societies, Meerut, after the RWA’s executive committee elections on April 26, 2015. The complaint mentioned how individuals not staying in the sector were allowed to contest the election. It also stated that though the constitution mentions 14 office bearers, elections were held for only 13 positions.

The complainant charged Vimal Sharma, former president of the RWA, with misuse of office and power.

The deputy registrar forwarded the case to the district magistrate of Noida, who handed it over to the SDM.

In his defence, Sharma had informed the SDM court that the RWA by-laws had the provision for proxy voting by any authorised person. The reply stated that the complainant had not objected to the process of the election and that the provision was discussed and decided in the presence of most members of the RWA. It also stated that it was only after the results were announced that the complainant made his objections before the deputy registrar. 

Countering Sharma’s claim, the complainant’s lawyer had argued that a fair election cannot be ensured with the provision for proxy voting by an authorised person. He had further argued that the voting rights should rest with only those members who are present at the time of voting.

Upon hearing both the sides, the SDM had observed that the RWA by-laws did not provide any provisions for proxy voting. And if any such practice is followed, the election process cannot be termed fair. He had, thus, declared the elections held earlier null and void, and had ordered fresh polls to be conducted within a month.