Residents of Vatika City, a residential society in sector 49, Gurugram, alleged that the current RWA President of Vatika City AOA (VCAOA) is not managing the society's affairs in a transparent manner. Now they are planning to take this issue with the State Registrar for not implementing the District Registrar order.
The residents informed that the District Registrar on July 26 issued an order to take action against the involvement of the previous governing body in mismanagement and misappropriation of fund and procedural irregularities for allotment of facade painting contract. However, the order was not officially disclosed to any resident or other official RWA members.
The order came after one of the residents, Narinder Juneja, of the society complained to the District Registrar alleging that the previous RWA did not follow the proper procedure while awarding the facade painting contract in 2017. They further alleged that it did not even follow the basic norms and requirements before allotting the contract at an exorbitant rate of Rs 5.84 crores. They alleged that the RWA was making unnecessary expenditures and giving contracts to incompetent contractors.
Satyavan Dagar, Vice President of Vatika City AOA, claimed that he had informed the current General Secretary about the matter. Dagar claimed, "When we received the reminder mail on August 7 which was sent on my personal email id, I asked the current General Secretary, Anil Malhotra, to take action and inform the District Registrar. I also suggested calling the EC meeting and discussing this matter, but no action was taken by the General Secretary."
He further accused, "We as the executive committee members of the governing body do not have the full access to the official email id. Only the president and general secretary of the society have full access. As the VP of the society, I can only access those mails which the president feels to share with me. However, the email id which no EC member can access is being used by the former General Secretary for sending official emails."
The residents also alleged that misuse of funds also took place when the current President, Giriraj Gupta, held the same position in the previous governing body.
A resident, Binita Mohanty, alleged that the committee formation was done in a fraudulent manner. Mohanty said, “There are several instances when the current RWA president completely ignored the residents' objections or suggestion while hiring and giving contracts for the development works of the society. Hence, they should resign immediately."
They have demanded that the General Body Meeting (GBM) should be called upon to review all the issues raised by the residents. "VCAOA should be transparent not only to EC members but to the entire Vatika City residents. Even after paying hefty maintenance charges, we are facing difficulties. The system should be more transparent, communicative and reachable to all," said Dagar.
The residents informed that there are only 320 members out of 1,374 flats. A resident on the condition of anonymity claimed, "The president works on the whims and fancies of his own. Even if we raise our objection about society on social media platform they simply block us and threaten us with harassment charges. It is completely absurd how they are conducting themselves, managing the society affairs and muzzling voices of the residents."
Meanwhile IS Yadav, District Registrar of Societies and Firms pointed out that the order cannot be revised, however, it can only be challenged with the state registrar as per the HRRS Act 2012. He said, "I have again issued a reminder to the president and the general secretary of the society for a response on how they will implement the order."
When CitySpidey talked to the Giriraj Gupta, president of Vatika City, he refuted the claims made by residents. He said, "The order was against the previous governing body of the RWA that is why the former general secretary gave the response on the order."
Gupta further informed that an inquiry on the allegations made against facade painting contract was done by an officer appointed by the District Registrar. In his report, the officer observed that the contract was finalised by Enviro, the service provider of Vatika City, and not by the RWA. He also mentioned that the funds were not misused by them, adding that the District Registrar did not consider the inquiry officer's report, and now they were going to take the matter before the state registrar.TAGS: Vatika City / sector 49 / Gurugram / Vatika City AOA (VCAOA) / District Registrar order / District Registrar