As per the rules and regulations of the Club, it is governed by an elected Committee comprised of 7 members collectively called the Managing Committee. These members are elected at a General Meeting of the Club, serve a term of 1 year which is extendable to a maximum of 15 months, are eligible for re – election and stay in power till a new Committee is elected. These rules and guidelines are very clearly stated in the ‘Rules of The Shillong Club Limited Shillong Meghalaya’ (reprinted and amended up to December 1996)

It is when these rules and regulations of the Club have been read and clearly understood that the intrigue of the present debacle regarding the Club surfaces. The present members of the Managing Committee, in blatant violation of the above stated rules, have served a term of 4 years without an election taking place since the time they came into power.

This year, elections were announced by this Managing Committee and they had posted a notice on the Club notice board on the 13th of March 2009 which read:

1.    09.04.2009        1400 hrs    Last date of receipt of nominations from permanent members only

2.    16.04.2009        1400 hrs    Last date of withdrawal of nominations

3.    29.05.2009        1400 hrs    Last date and time for receipt of ballot papers

4.    20.05.2009        1500 hrs    Annual General Meeting.

This notice was signed by the Member Secretary Mr. Siddharath. Ghosh. By another subsequent notice, the last date for withdrawal was shifted to 17.04.2009 as 16.04.2009 was the Lok Sabha General Elections Polling day in Meghalaya. After the filings and withdrawals, 17 candidates remained in the fray for the ensuing elections to the Managing Committee of which included five of the present members of the existing Managing Committee who were seeking re – election. Having doubts about the conduct of the elections, 7 of these 17 members who were contesting the elections wrote a letter to the Managing Committee on the 24th of April 2009 raising certain points about the conduct of these elections. These were:

a.    To appoint an election Presiding Officer who would be a neutral person.

b.    For a ballot box to be kept in the Shillong Club dance room and that this box is to have two locks, of which one key is to be kept with these 7 members.

c.    To be enabled to be present when the office staff are putting the ballot papers into the envelopes and sealing the same and also to accompany the office staff to the post office when the envelopes are being posted.

Thereafter, the Managing Committee received another letter dated 04.05.2009 shown to have been signed by 139 members of the Club whereby a requisition was made for an Extra – Ordinary General Meeting (EOGM) under Article 54 of its Articles of Association which states ‘The Committee may, whenever they think fit and shall upon requisition made by one tenth of Permanent members not disqualified from so doing by the provision of Articles 47 or 48 convene an Extraordinary General Meeting. The requisition shall specify the object of the meeting and only the business so specified shall be discussed at the meeting. The notice convening the meeting shall be issued within 21 days from the date of receipt of the requisition and the Meeting shall be held within 3 months from the date of receipt of the requisition.’ In keeping with this Article 54, the members sought discussion on;

1.    Election mechanism and procedures

2.    List of members of the Club

3.    List of new members of the Club w.e.f 01.01.2009

4.    Criteria for selection of an Honourary Member

5.    Issue of Lessee / Contractor / holder of Office of Profit under The Shillong Club Limited contesting election to the Managing Committee

6.    Proposed amendments of the Articles of Association

7.    Full facts and details of the receipt of Rs. 5 lakhs from the Directorate of Tourism, Government of Meghalaya, by the ‘Shillong Golf Club’

8.    Full facts and reasons for the resignations of Mr. D.D. Laloo and Mr. S. Ghosh from the Committee and the appointment of Mr. D. Ghosh as Honourary Secretary.

9.    Full facts and details of lease / sale of Club land/ proposed construction of the business complex on Club land.

Much to the chagrin of the members, the Managing Committee refused to hold the proposed EOGM stating that the issues proposed were not relevant points of discussion in an EOGM. As for point 9 in the afore mentioned list, the Managing Committee stated that the requisitioned EOGM did not specify which lease or sale of Club land or proposed constructions of business complex on Club land is being referred to. Moreover, when the AGM is already convened then there is no reason as to why this issue is required to be discussed in an EOGM prior to the AGM. The Managing Committee further stated that no land or any other asset of the Club has been alienated or transferred by any means whatsoever to any other person but a ‘Build – Operate – Transfer Agreement’ dated 21.01.2009 for the developing better facilities to members which had been entered into with permanent members of the Club, namely Mr. H. K. Lougani and Mr. Vincent. H. Pala without alienating or transferring any land or asset of the Club to them.

Sensing that nothing was going to come out of the requisition for an EOGM, the members sent two other letters to the Managing Committee dated 08.05.2009 whereby they said that if their demands were not met then they would have no other option but to move to the appropriate authority. Immediately after this, the Managing Committee moved to court and sought an injunction on the proposed EOGM. It may be mentioned here that in the Supreme Court in Case 264 (1986) of the dispute between LIC and ESCORTS LTD AND OTHERS, had ruled that no court could interfere in the matter of a requisition of an EOGM by members of any company.

It was only after this request for an injunction was filed that the full details of the agreement came to light. It was revealed that the Managing Committee of the Club had entered into an agreement through which it had decided to earmark about two and a half acres of Club land for the setting up of a five star hotel amongst other development works. The developers, namely Mr. Kalachand Loungani and Mr. Vincent Pala, through the Lease Agreement dated 12th January 2009 were given charge of developing a plot of land measuring 21,060.93 square meters on a ‘Build – Operate – Transfer Agreement’ of 30 years. The developers are to invest a minimum of Rs. 30 Crores towards developing the plot and are to finish the project within 48 months. They are also to pay an annual license fee of 7 Lakhs. After this period of 48 months, if the project is not completed, they are to pay an annual license fee of 10 Lakhs during the extension period of the project for 1 year. However, in the event that the project work can not be completed within the fifth year, the annual license fees shall be the full rate as applicable of an amount of 63.33 lakhs which shall be made applicable from the sixth year with an increment of 10% every subsequent five years.

Eastern Panorama recently had a chance to discuss this matter with one of the members of the Club Mr. Suresh Singh. In the discussion, Mr. Singh made it very clear that the members of the Club were not privy to the deal. In fact, he went so far as to say that the Managing Committee had kept the agreement a secret from the other members of the Club for 5 months and details of it would never have surfaced had it not been for the requisition of the EOGM. He questions the need of a hotel for Club members when it is clearly stated in the rule book of the Club that the Club was founded as a sporting and recreational institution. According to him, development of Club land should be along the lines of a gym and a swimming pool amongst other things that the Club still lacks. He also says that the deal was made with the vested interests of the Managing Committee in mind, that was why it was kept under wraps and away from the knowledge of the other members.

He also says that the members of the Managing Committee have fabricated the details of the EOGM that was held on the 20th of February 2008.

In the minutes of the meeting, it is stated that the issue of a Master Plan for development of additional infrastructure in a portion of the vacant land and within the Club premises was discussed in this meeting and that The EOGM resolved that finalisation of the Proposed Master Plan must be carried out by the Managing Committee in a judicious manner. Mr. Singh says that members of the Club who attended that meeting have informed him that the issue was never discussed in the said meeting and that no such resolution was ever arrived at. He also says that the Managing Committee never got the approval of the revenue department of the Club to go ahead with the deal. As such, the Managing Committee have bypassed all the rules and regulations of the Club and entered into the agreement to serve their own interests. Regarding the financial aspects of this deal, Mr. Singh says that the revenue generated for the Club through the deal as it stands right now is ‘peanuts’. The rate of increment of 10% per five years is absurd and well below the norm according to Mr. Singh. And here, we are just talking about the rate of increment.

These facts clearly indicate that this deal is totally in favour of the developers which makes one wonder what other agreements have been made to push this agreement. Whatever the case may be, the matter has been taken to court and since both parties are adamant in their stand, it is highly unlikely that the matter will be resolved anytime soon. 

D Nampui