Moneycontrol PRO
HomeNewsBusinessReal EstateDilution of RERA rules: SC directs state governments to respond to Centre's queries by May 15

Dilution of RERA rules: SC directs state governments to respond to Centre's queries by May 15

Only five states have so far responded to the Centre's queries; all chief secretaries asked to respond on or before May 15.

April 18, 2022 / 21:44 IST
Representative image.

The Supreme Court on April 18 directed all states to respond to the government and the amicus curiae's queries on the implementation of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) (RERA) Act, 2016 rules.

The amicus curiae Devashish Bharuka informed the court that so far only five states had responded to the queries raised by the Centre with regard to the RERA rules. He said that some deviations were found and he had asked the states to cite the reasons for those deviations.

A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant said that the Centre had written to all the states seeking certain information with regard to the agreement of sales rules notified under the RERA Act and their compliance but only five states have so far responded to it. The top court directed all the chief secretaries to respond to the queries on or before May 15.

“In order to facilitate the exercise carried by the union, we direct all the chief secretaries to positively respond to the queries raised by the union and to circulate the necessary information regarding the Rera rules on or before 15th May,” the bench said.

It also said that Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati and the amicus will file a status report after receiving the information from the states.

The next date of hearing will be held in the third week of July.

The order is awaited.

The Supreme Court on February 14 directed the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs to scrutinise whether the rules adopted by the states under Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) comply with those framed by the Centre and appointed advocate-on-record Bharuka as amicus curiae in the case.

“Dilution of general rules by the states has left many projects out of the ambit of RERA. Such projects are under no obligation to give any timeline to any authorities as to when will they complete their projects leaving several homebuyers in the lurch. We have been raising the issue of dilution at every forum,” said Abhay Upadhyay, president of The Forum for People's Collective Efforts (FPCE).

On April 12, Union Minister for Housing and Urban Affairs Hardeep Singh Puri said that there should be no dilution of the provisions of the RERA by the states.

“No dilution is a norm. Those who have diluted will have to justify why they have diluted. And we will not bring the whole template down just because you have diluted it,” he had said at the third meeting of the Central Advisory Council (CAC), constituted under the RERA Act, 2016.

The Supreme Court on January 17 told the Centre that it was not in favour of separate state governments having builder-buyer agreements, but would rather prefer a national-level model to deter builders from fleecing homebuyers.

“We are concerned about the broader public interest of the middle-class home buyers,” Justices Chandrachud and Kant said and asked the Centre to consider framing uniform rules under the provisions of RERA.

On November 8, 2021, the Supreme Court had said that a model builder-buyer agreement is needed in the real estate sector and the Centre should file its reply on the issue as it is an "important matter in the public interest".

On October 4, the top court had issued a notice to the Centre, asking it to frame model agreements for the builder-buyer and the agent-buyer deals to bring in more transparency in the real-estate sector.

A PIL has been filed by advocate and BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay, seeking a direction to all states to enforce a model builder-buyer agreement and a model agent-buyer agreement and to take steps to avoid "mental, physical and financial injury" to customers.

"Promoters, builders and agents use manifestly arbitrary one-sided agreements that do not place customers at an equal platform with them, which offends Articles 14, 15, 21 of the Constitution.

"There have been many cases of deliberate inordinate delays in handing over possession and customers lodge complaints but the police don't register FIRs, citing arbitrary clauses of the agreement," the PIL had said.

Vandana Ramnani
Vandana Ramnani
first published: Apr 18, 2022 09:41 pm

Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!

Subscribe to Tech Newsletters

  • On Saturdays

    Find the best of Al News in one place, specially curated for you every weekend.

  • Daily-Weekdays

    Stay on top of the latest tech trends and biggest startup news.

Advisory Alert: It has come to our attention that certain individuals are representing themselves as affiliates of Moneycontrol and soliciting funds on the false promise of assured returns on their investments. We wish to reiterate that Moneycontrol does not solicit funds from investors and neither does it promise any assured returns. In case you are approached by anyone making such claims, please write to us at grievanceofficer@nw18.com or call on 02268882347