LETTER FOR RECONSIDERING THE GBM DECISION ON FUND RAISING FOR

COMPLEX REPAIR

We, as OTT AoA members of Omaxe Twin Towers, Sector 50, Noida would like to highlight
certain aspects that brings into question the overall exercise of fund raising for OTT’s repair
urging the EC to reconsider the decisions taken in the GBM on the subject.

1. In reference to the GBM dated 19th May 2019 wherein it was adjourned for lack of quorum, the
notification of its reconvening after an hour was not made available, a necessity as per Bye Laws,
This led a lot of residents to believe (Mr. Bisaria being one such example) that the GBM is
postponed till further notice, bringing into question the validity of the GBM and the action taken
thereof.

2. The proposed amount of Rs. 34 lakhs being raised is too high to be justifiably considered as an
agenda item without any facts and figures being made available in advance to all residents
through detailed costing analysis and work to be carried out in electronic/paper form.

3. As can be inferred from discussions happening over email on the topic of repair items, the
observation has been there is a lack of clarity on the necessity of the work to be carried out.

4. From Mr Kala’s (erstwhile OTT AoA president) mail it is evident that a revised estimate is to
be prepared as some of the jobs have been already done by the earlier EC. The amount of Rs.
24000 has been decided just like that without any exercise on the actual pending jobs.

5) It is noticed that fund of the society are being spent unnecessarily and there is compromise on
quality of jobs done.

6) Approval of any Agenda having financial implication must be circulated with all
details/estimates along with the Agenda. Approval of such Agenda just like that by the members
present is unethical and not a good practice. Some more members who believe in prudential
spending of common fund would have participated had the implication known to them in
advance.

7) Since the amount is substantial the following must be clearly spelt out before raising the fund:
  whether the job would be awarded on nomination basis or tendering process?
 who will oversee the implementation?
 whether any Committee would be formed or not.?

Overall we urge that the GBM be reconvened again with the rightful justification on the work
deemed to be carried out and the detailed costing analysis given the significant cost involved as
has been put forth. Further the Agenda along with all the above clauses be circulated to all
residents at least 7 days in advance of the General Meeting to be reconvened for approval of this
special agenda