For most residents, redevelopment is expected to bring safer
homes, larger apartments and better amenities. But alongside the excitement
comes another question—one that is increasingly being discussed by senior
citizens during their evening walks at Shivaji Park.
Can you trust your own society committee?
When "Clean Image" Meets Power
One senior resident from Shivaji Park, who requested anonymity, shared an observation that has become a frequent topic of discussion among neighbours.
According to him, many committee members begin their tenure
with promises of transparency, accessibility and putting residents first. But once
the society formally approves redevelopment and negotiations begin, the
atmosphere changes.
He described it this way:
"Initially, they present themselves as honest and
approachable. But once the redevelopment process starts, some suddenly become
difficult to question. Meetings become one-sided, uncomfortable questions are
brushed aside, and residents who seek clarification are made to feel like they
are creating unnecessary problems."
Why the "Chuppa Rustom" Comparison?
The comparison to Chuppa Rustom in this context is being
used symbolically by some residents, not as a statement of fact about
any individual. It reflects a perception that a leader may project an image of
transparency and accountability before gaining support, but is then seen by
critics as becoming less open to scrutiny once in a position of authority.
Whether or not one agrees with that comparison, the
underlying concern voiced by residents is broader: power without
accountability can erode trust, regardless of who holds it.
