Subject: Query regarding
1. Establishing / authorising Badminton Court in the Open Space in the Society Premises within the purview of the provision of Byelaw 168
2. Implementing a decision only if the polling result is passed UNANIMOUSLY or with MAJORITY

Most Respected Sir,
We have two queries. The queries are as follows:

1. MC (Managing Committee) created a Badminton court couple of years back for Sports day, though MC never took the resolution to earmark open area for badminton Court in the AGM within the purview of the provision of Byelaw 168 of the Society. Hence, the Agenda to earmark space for badminton court was never tabled in front of the General body under the purview of the provision of Byelaw 168.
In 2018, the AGM though passed a resolution that badminton can be played till 10:30 pm (earlier there was no time limit and this resolution capped the time to play badminton till 10:30pm). The same AGM also rejected one of the resolutions, which involved turfing the badminton court. Turfing of the badminton Court was rejected once again in the last AGM in 2019 again.

Query: Do we need to call SGBM to discuss this afresh especially keeping in mind that General body passed a resolution to Cap the time and also rejected twice the proposal to turf the Badminton Court (indirect reference that the area has been approved/authorised for Badminton court)? Or Can we infer that the General Body has approved playing badminton, in the open space.

2. Now, one of the MC member wants to shut the badminton court permanently (or put a time limit of 8:30pm, whereas the AGM had passed a resolution to cap it at 10:30pm). He is insisting that this badminton court is illegal and desires to call a SGBM to discuss afresh and decide in principle if certain Outdoor Sports Facilities namely Badminton court should be authorised in the Open Space in the Society Premises within the purview of the provision of Bye Law 5 and Byelaw 168 of the Society. He has written a complaint to the Managing committee in the capacity of a member of CHS and also few of his friends (5-6) have written a complaint that they get disturbed by the Sports. The above MC member is claiming that this needs to be passed UNANIMOUSLY and it cannot be implemented if the decision is not unanimous (even if decision is passed with majority). He says even if few members (minority) oppose this, it can-not be implemented, since they don't want this sport activity (Hence they want this to be unanimous and not with majority)

Query Do we need to pass the decision unanimously or is it OK to pass it with majority? Can the resolution be implemented, if it is passed with majority only OR IT NEEDS TO BE PASSED UNANIMOUSLY?

We are requesting you to guide us on the above.
 CHS, property-related issues
Sub : Need help, Support, and Guidance for
1) To Eradicate Corruption.
(2) Violation of Articles 21 and 47 of Constitution of India
(3) Violation of FSSAI Act 2006 and 20011
(4) Abused & mis-used official powers – FSSAI officer
(5) Mis-leading of ISO:22000 & FSSC:22000 International

I am Senior Citizen and resident of Borivali (W) Mumbai.

I am a Senior Citizen. A victimized & Aggrieved Consumer.
I hereby request you to help, support, guide & advise me.

I have purchased Parle Export quality biscuits, found, Adulterated & Substandard, Inferior and Infected.
(manufactured by sub-contractor- Bunty Foods Pvt. Ltd. Ambernath, Thane, having ISO:2005 certification, uses Burnt, Over-baked, Un-baked and broken biscuits for making fresh biscuits, Maida is being used instead Wheat flour as exhibited on wrappers)

( Mostly, this type of Un-healthy and harmful biscuits are consumed by poor and innocent consumers who residing slum areas. Additionally, duplicate/bogus biscuits are sold in the market too!
You are working for betterment of people in Asia’s largest slum colony called Dharavi since 1979.)

Lodged the complaint to Parle & FDA, Mumbai. No response.
(Parle has ISO:2200 & FSSC:22000 certification means guarantee for Quality and Safety of foods)

Lodged the complaint to ISO:22000 & FSSC:22000. Organizations.
No response.

Complaint against Bunty, forwarded to Honorable Lokayukta, Mumbai
Honorable Lokayukta, ordered FDA, Mumbai for investigation.

FDA, raided FBO, Bunty, found “Serious Deficiencies” reported to cancel manufacturing license.
FDA submitted the report to the Joint Director, FSSAI, WR, Mumbai for
Further action.

Abused & mis-used official powers – FSSAI officer
Corrupted Joint Director, asked FDA not to take any further action as
FBO, Bunty has full filled the requirement raised by FDA.
(FSSAI officer visited premises of FBO, Bunty as per report, NOT manufacturing plant, not inspected, not tested products-biscuits, No proper reports available)
Till the date Bunty matter is not resolved.

FDA did not resolve my Parle complaint till the date.

FSSAI, New Delhi, ordered FDA Mumbai to investigation & action, till the date NO response from FDA.

Also, Chief Secretary of Maharashtra has forwarded my complaint to FDA
For further action,
(Since enforcement of Act, 2006 and Rules and Regulations made thereunder is primarily the responsibility of State, the Commissioner of Food Safety Maharashtra to take action as per provisions of FSS Act, 2006 Rules and Regulations made thereunder.
This is prima-facie a violation of section 22 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.)

I lodged complaint against Commissioner FDA Mumbai, to the Honorable Lokayukta.
Till the date NO response.

All European International Organization are useless and bogus, they want only money and fame. Not Quality and Safety of foods.

Therefore, I would like to take legal action against all these bodies like Public Interest Litigation ( PIL ) in Mumbai High Court. Or as per your advice.

Or if, you have any other alternative/substitute solution to resolve the matter.

Do not hesitate to contact me for any further informations.
All e-mail communications available and shall be produced as and when required.

NOTE :- Attached PDF file for your action which is to be implemented by law

Hopping for better advice, help and guidance.

Vishnu Karnataki
( A senior citizen, Victimized & Aggrieved Consumer)
e-mail :

 Filing PILs