Lawfully yours: By Retd Justice K Chandru

Check on bylaws needed to stop societies from fleecing flat owners

Q. I refer to a recent Madras High Court order, which stated that the collection of transfer fee at every sale of a flat by the Flat Owners’ Association is impermissible and any amendment to the bylaws could come into effect only after the Registrar of Societies approved of such changes.

Most of the Flat Owners’ Associations are unregistered. And most associations collect a small amount, say Rs 1,000/Rs 2,000, as an entrance/ membership fee whenever the flats change hands and the new owner becomes a member of the association. The very idea of levying a membership fee on the new member is to augment the corpus fund for the association. When such fees are levied based on the collective decision of the members, what is wrong? This is akin to hospitals levying a registration charge on every new patient. Your advice, please.

— K Harihar, T Nagar

A. You have not understood the import of the judgement. It only reiterates that no bylaw of society comes into operation without it being registered with the Registrar of Societies. If there is a proper amendment made to the bylaws of the society and filed with the registrar, then it comes into operation the day it’s registered. The observations made by the judge that there is no meaning in collecting transfer fees or entrance fees are his opinion. Some Bar associations charge Rs 50,000 as entrance fees. Some workers’ associations are charging several lakhs as entrance fees. No one can question the bylaws of a private society unless the government restricts through law making of such bylaws.

State can’t have laissez-faire approach to workers’ rights

Q. Are trade unions muscling their way to force the State government to repeal its amendment to trade laws justified? Though the amendment proposes to extend the daily shifts of factory workers to 12 hours — from the existing eight — it comes with the benefit of opting for a four-day work week. Tamil Nadu is trying hard to expand its manufacturing base and take advantage of the prevailing geopolitical situation where large corporations are exploring options other than China. Can’t the amendment be seen in this light?

— Marimuthu Ramanathan, Chromepet

A.The Supreme Court once held: “Gone are the days of laissez-faire economy”. In a matter between workers and management, the workers are unable to dictate their terms. Hence the State intervenes on behalf of the people to settle the trade disputes. Even the State is bound by International Labour Organisation (ILO) norms on matters of work hours and holidays. Right from 1919, the norms are 8-hour per day only.

This country with its socialist preamble and directive principles incorporated in part 4 of the Constitution cannot pander to “large corporations exploring options” as suggested by you.