'Most have tariff cards for bribes': Mohandas Pai rebuts Shamika Ravi after Supreme Court says ‘better abolish’ RERA

Ravi had responded to a news report on the Supreme Court’s oral observations on Thursday questioning the functioning of real estate regulatory authorities. (Representative image)

• Mohandas Pai alleges rising corruption in real estate regulators
• Supreme Court criticizes RERA authorities' functioning
• Shamika Ravi defends RERA, urges reforms over abolition

Did our AI summary help?

Former Infosys CFO Mohandas Pai has alleged a rise in corruption within real estate regulatory authorities, responding sharply to economist Shamika Ravi’s defence of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act in the backdrop of strong observations by the Supreme Court.

“There has been an increase in bribes. Please check out. Most have a tariff cards for bribes,” Pai said, reacting to Ravi’s post on X in which she backed RERA and urged reforms rather than dismantling the framework.

Pai’s remarks came after Ravi, a member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, argued that the regulatory law has delivered benefits despite uneven implementation.

Shamika Ravi’s defence of RERA

Ravi had responded to a news report on the Supreme Court’s oral observations on Thursday questioning the functioning of real estate regulatory authorities. She maintained that the law has improved the sector’s functioning over time.

“Research shows that RERA has been a net positive for Indian real estate - more transparency, buyer protection and investor confidence. There is no strong empirical evidence suggesting the Act has caused systemic harm that outweighs its benefits. RERA is institutionally sound but operationally uneven. The rational reform path is strengthening, not scrapping. Abolishing it would dismantle regulatory progress,” she said.

Her comments followed a report highlighting the top court’s strong criticism of how state-level authorities under the Act have been operating.

Supreme Court’s sharp observations

The Supreme Court, while hearing State of Himachal Pradesh vs Naresh Sharma, took a critical view of the way real estate regulatory authorities are functioning. The matter related to a challenge against a Himachal Pradesh High Court order that had stayed a state notification shifting the RERA office from Shimla to Dharamshala.

A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi remarked that states should reassess the purpose behind constituting such authorities.

"It is high time that all the states should revisit and rethink constituting this authority," CJI Surya Kant said.

"Except facilitating the builders in default, this institution is doing nothing. Better abolish this institution, we don't mind that," the CJI added.

The bench reiterated that it was time for states to reflect on whether the regulatory bodies were serving their intended purpose. When informed that a retired IAS officer had been appointed in RERA, the Chief Justice remarked, “In every state, it has become a rehabilitation centre. These authorities are all occupied by these persons.”

The court also observed that those for whom the mechanism was created appear disillusioned. "The people for whom this institution was created, they are completely depressed, disgusted and disappointed. None of them are getting any effective relief. For whom this institution actually is now serving, you will find out when you meet these people," the CJI said.

Earlier, in September 2024, another bench had described RERA bodies as “rehabilitation centres for former bureaucrats who have frustrated the entire scheme of the Act.”

Case background and court directions

The Himachal Pradesh High Court had earlier stayed the notification shifting the RERA office, noting that the decision was taken “without even identifying the alternative office place.” It had said that the move, along with orders adjusting outsourced employees to other boards and corporations, could render the authority non-functional.

On February 12, the Supreme Court intervened and allowed the state to move the RERA office to Dharamshala, also directing that the appellate tribunal be shifted to ensure affected parties are not inconvenienced.

The RERA Act of 2016 was enacted to regulate the real estate sector, promote transparency, protect homebuyers and ensure timely completion of projects. However, the court’s recent remarks have reignited debate over whether the authorities are fulfilling that mandate — a debate now amplified by Pai’s allegations and Ravi’s defence.