A badminton coach in Pune enquired about the possibility of constructing a temporary tin shed for a badminton complex on an abandoned open ground belonging to a housing society. The society chairman cited a rule requiring 20% of the area to be kept open for playing purposes. The coach questioned if a tin shed would qualify and if municipal permission could be sought. However, the query was deemed repetitive and potentially an attempt to misuse society land, with experts advising against further repeated questions and suggesting consultation with a local lawyer.