Does Section 79A Require a Redevelopment Website? Notices, Minutes and Member Access Explained

This question matters because housing societies increasingly rely on WhatsApp groups, email chains and shared folders during redevelopment. Those tools may help communication, but the 2019 Section 79A framework goes further: it contemplates a dedicated internet website as a transparency mechanism and separately deals with sending notices and minutes to members.

For societies, the practical issue is therefore not just whether a page exists online. It is whether members can reliably find the current redevelopment record, distinguish final documents from drafts, see notices and minutes, and access the PMC's material without depending on individual committee members to forward files.

What exactly does the 4 July 2019 Section 79A direction say about a website?

Clause 6 of the official Government Resolution is the key provision. In substance, it provides that societies proposing redevelopment should create a website on the internet in the interest of transparency. The website is to contain redevelopment-related information, including examples such as notices, minutes of meetings and the Project Management Consultant's report. The information is to be available to the members of the society.

The same clause then deals with member communication. Notices and minutes relating to the project are to be sent to members through the channels stated in the direction, including email, personal delivery or registered post. Members are expected to provide their email IDs and contact details. The Registrar is to be informed about the website, and the information is also to be displayed on the society's notice board.

So is the redevelopment website legally “mandatory”?

The safest legal wording in 2026 is this: the website is expressly provided for in the 4 July 2019 Section 79A redevelopment directions, but the Bombay High Court has held that those directions are directory in nature.

In Devendra Kumar Jain v. State of Maharashtra, decided on 6 October 2025, the Bombay High Court stated that the 4 July 2019 Government Resolution is directory and is intended to promote a fair and transparent redevelopment process. The Court said that every deviation or procedural lapse does not by itself create an actionable wrong unless it defeats the object of the directions or violates an express statutory requirement.

That position was reinforced again very recently in Dudhsagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., decided on 24 August 2026. The Bombay High Court referred to the 2019 Government Resolution as standard redevelopment guidelines and reiterated that it is neither a rigid mandatory code nor a basis for automatically invalidating a redevelopment because of every procedural lapse.

Who is responsible for creating the redevelopment website?

The wording of clause 6 places the requirement on the society proposing redevelopment. It does not make the developer the primary legal owner of the transparency obligation.

A developer, PMC, web agency or specialised redevelopment-portal provider can build and maintain the technology. But the society should retain governance control over:

• which documents are treated as official;
• who can upload, replace or approve files;
• member access permissions;
• the accuracy of notices and minutes;
• version history and document dates;
• what information is public versus member-only;
• how the portal is preserved if the PMC or developer changes.

This is particularly important because the society may change its developer, PMC, advocate or managing committee during a multi-year redevelopment. The project record should survive those changes.

What should be uploaded to a Section 79A redevelopment website?

The Government Resolution expressly identifies examples such as notices, minutes and the PMC report. That is the legal core. For a well-run redevelopment, the site can become the controlled repository for the wider project record as well.

Core documents expressly aligned with the 2019 direction

• Special General Body Meeting notices;
• meeting agendas where relevant;
• minutes of managing committee and redevelopment-related general body meetings;
• PMC / architect reports and project-report material;
• official redevelopment notices and member communications.

Additional records that are usually useful for member transparency

• PMC appointment and scope;
• feasibility reports and approved revisions;
• tender documents and comparison statements;
• developer-selection resolutions;
• Development Agreement and PAAA information appropriate for member access;
• sanctioned plans, IOD/approval information and commencement milestones;
• MahaRERA information where applicable;
• bank guarantee and insurance records where appropriate;
• transit-rent schedules and payment-status information;
• construction progress reports;
• handover, occupation and possession records.

Does the Section 79A website have to be public?

The 2019 direction says that the redevelopment information on the website should be available to members of the society. It does not expressly say that every redevelopment document must be visible to the entire internet.

That distinction supports a sensible access model. A society can have a public-facing page for general project information and a secure member area for minutes, reports, agreements, member notices and sensitive records. The exact access design should be reviewed with the society's advocate, especially where documents contain personal data or privileged legal material.

A practical three-level access model

Can email, WhatsApp or Google Drive replace the redevelopment website?

The 2019 direction treats the website, direct member communication and the physical notice board as separate parts of the transparency system. That makes it difficult to describe WhatsApp or email alone as a complete substitute for the website contemplated by clause 6.

Each channel solves a different problem:

• Email / registered post / personal delivery helps prove that formal notices and minutes were sent.
• Notice board provides an on-premises disclosure channel.
• Website or portal gives members a continuing place to retrieve the redevelopment record.
• WhatsApp is useful for alerts and discussion but is poor as the authoritative archive because messages can be buried, deleted, forwarded without context or split across groups.
• Shared-drive folders can store files but often lack clear version control, structured permissions, milestones and member-facing navigation unless carefully managed.

What should societies do with notices and minutes?

For redevelopment, the strongest practice is to separate delivery from archive. A formal notice can be sent by the method required by the applicable framework and the society's legal advice, while the same approved document is also placed in the portal as the authoritative archive copy.

Minutes should be handled similarly. Members should not have to search old email threads to determine which version is final. The portal should clearly identify the meeting date, document type, approval/final status and upload date.

Recommended metadata for each redevelopment document

• document title;
• document category;
• meeting or effective date;
• version or revision number;
• final / draft status;
• upload date;
• access level;
• related milestone;
• superseded-document link where applicable.

What does “member access” really mean?

Member access should mean more than receiving a password. A system fails its transparency purpose if members cannot find documents, the files are not readable on mobile, old versions are mixed with current ones or access depends on one committee member manually approving every request.

A practical member portal should therefore be:

1. Searchable.
   Members should be able to find a notice, minute, approval or PMC report without knowing the exact filename.
2. Chronological.
   Documents and milestones should show the redevelopment sequence clearly.
3. Permission-controlled.
   Society-wide documents and member-specific records should not be mixed indiscriminately.
4. Version-controlled.
   Superseded drafts should not look identical to approved documents.
5. Mobile usable.
   Members should be able to read and download documents from a phone.
6. Exportable and durable.
   The society should be able to retain its data even if the technology vendor, developer or PMC changes.

Does Section 79A require a basic website or a full redevelopment portal?

The Government Resolution uses the concept of an internet website. It does not prescribe a software stack, dashboard design, AI assistant, database, member login architecture or commercial technology product.

So a society should distinguish between legal/process intent and technology implementation. A simple website may satisfy the basic function if it reliably provides the required information to members. A dedicated redevelopment portal can go further by adding structured documents, permissions, progress tracking, member-specific records, audit trails and AI-assisted retrieval.

For a wider explanation of the legal framework, see Section 79A Redevelopment in Maharashtra: What Housing Societies Need to Know. For portal features and implementation, see Redevelopment Portal for Housing Societies in Mumbai.

Section 79A website checklist for a managing committee

• Create the website/portal early enough that it becomes the project record, not an afterthought.
• Use a society-controlled domain/account wherever practical.
• Identify who can publish documents and who approves them.
• Upload official notices, approved minutes and PMC reports promptly.
• Keep direct notice-delivery records separately; do not assume uploading alone proves service.
• Inform the Registrar about the website in the manner advised by the society's professionals.
• Maintain the physical society notice board as required by the framework.
• Keep a current member email/contact register.
• Separate public, member-only and member-specific access.
• Preserve document versions and dates.
• Back up the portal and ensure the society can export its records.
• Do not publish privileged legal advice or personal data without appropriate review.
• Review the portal during committee, PMC or developer transitions.

Frequently asked questions

Does Section 79A require a redevelopment website in Maharashtra?

The 4 July 2019 redevelopment directions issued under Section 79A expressly provide that societies proposing redevelopment should create an internet website for transparency and place redevelopment information there for members. Current Bombay High Court case law treats the directions as directory, so non-compliance with one procedural item does not automatically invalidate the entire redevelopment.

What documents should be placed on the redevelopment website?

The 2019 direction expressly gives examples including notices, meeting minutes and the Project Management Consultant's report. Societies can also use the portal for resolutions, tender records, agreements, approvals and project updates, subject to appropriate access controls.

Does the redevelopment website have to be public?

The Government direction states that the information should be available to society members. It does not expressly require every document to be public. Member login and permission controls are therefore a sensible implementation for sensitive records.

Can WhatsApp replace the Section 79A website?

WhatsApp can be useful for alerts and discussion, but the 2019 framework separately provides for an internet website, direct communication of notices/minutes and the society notice board. WhatsApp is not a strong authoritative record system.

Who should own the website—the society or developer?

The Government direction places the website responsibility on the society proposing redevelopment. A developer or vendor can provide the technology, but the society should control governance, access and continuity of the redevelopment record.

If a society has no website, is the redevelopment automatically illegal?

No automatic conclusion should be drawn. The website clause is expressly part of the 2019 framework, but Bombay High Court decisions have held the redevelopment directions to be directory. The consequences of a procedural omission depend on the facts, transparency, member participation and whether another statutory or contractual requirement has been breached.

Authoritative sources and current legal position

1. Government of Maharashtra — redevelopment directions dated 4 July 2019 under Section 79A.
2. Law and Judiciary Department — Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (official text).
3. Devendra Kumar Jain v. State of Maharashtra, Bombay High Court, 6 October 2025.
4. Dudhsagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. redevelopment appeals, Bombay High Court, 24 August 2026.
5. Department of Co-Operation, Marketing and Textiles — 4 November 2025 circular on redevelopment NOCs.