Should RERA be abolished? The Supreme Court questions its effectiveness amid delays, weak enforcement, and homebuyer grievances
Pradeep Kumar Biswal
In a recent sweeping comment on the functioning of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority in the states, the Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that the people for whom this institution was created are completely depressed, disgusted, and disappointed. None of them is getting any effective relief. RERA is only facilitating builders in default. It has become a rehabilitation centre for retired bureaucrats.
Better abolish it. This observation came while hearing a petition regarding the proposal of the state government for the shifting of the Himachal Pradesh RERA office to Dharamshala. This is not the first time that the Apex Court expressed displeasure over the functioning of RERA as an effective mechanism to address the grievances of the hapless homebuyers against the mighty builders.
Who’s to blame for this sorry state of affairs? Is it the Central Government putting in place a weak system or the state government trying to subvert it by nominating their henchmen? Or is it the failure of the RERA authorities to enforce the law ? I think everyone has a share in the present situation brewing over the years.
The Real Estate ( Regulation and Development ) Act, 2016, passed by the Parliament in March, 2016, came into force with effect from 1st May 2017. Almost all states have established RERA in their states. Jammu and Kashmir is the latest to join. Haryana has the distinction of having two separate RERAs, one at Gurugram and another at Panchkula. When the RERA was launched, it created a hype in the real estate sector and was expected to solve the long-aggrieved issues, particularly in redressing the grievances and regulating the property market in the country. Eight years have passed. Definitely, it has become successful in largely resolving the grievances of homebuyers within a reasonable time.
So, transparency has come to project accounts, and project completion has become faster. Moreover, it has generated awareness among the homebuyers about their rights and responsibilities mandated by the law. Then what prompted the Apex Court to come down heavily on the inefficient functioning of RERA? It reflects the Court’s frustration with uneven implementation, undue delays, weak enforcement, and instances where the process ends up favouring defaulting promoters over the harassed homebuyers. For all the reasons, the RERA authorities are not alone responsible. The inherent weakness of the law, the indifference of the state governments, and instances of unethical practices by the authorities at times to favour the builders together have led to such a grim scenario.
The main grievance of the aggrieved persons is that although they can get a favourable order from RERA, either it’s held up in appeal in the Tribunal or the High Court, or it gets delayed at the execution stage in the Civil Courts. Even for the recovery of the amount, the cases get delayed in the recovery proceedings before the revenue authorities.
The crux of the problem is that the law has not bestowed the power of the Civil Court on RERA, and there is no provision for the execution of its own order by RERA. Different RERAs have adopted different methods in this regard, but they are partially successful. The Government of India has been moved by AIFORERA to make suitable amendments in the law, but it has yet to be materialised. Unless and until the law confers the power on RERA to execute its own order, the issue shall continue to exist.
The state governments are equally responsible for the failure of RERA to fulfil its mandate under the law. Very often, the state governments are behaving casually in the timely appointment of the Chairperson and Members. Although the law requires the Chief Justice of the High Court or a sitting Judge to be nominated by the Chief Justice to head the Selection Committee, the state governments manage to get persons of their choice selected for appointment.
Even at times, persons without requisite qualifications are being appointed, bypassing eligible candidates. Once someone is appointed as Chairperson or Member, it’s difficult to remove them following the legal procedures. Again, for the execution of the RERA orders, the state governments don’t extend the required cooperation, making the orders redundant. Similarly, the state governments do not provide adequate office space and manpower for the smooth functioning of the office.
Sometimes, the Minister or the Chief Secretary attempts to interfere with and influence the Authority’s decisions, thereby compromising the Authority’s autonomy. During my tenure, I have faced such situations twice when the successive Ministers tried to favour a particular promoter who violated the law with impunity. Of course, I had to pay a price for that.
When the incumbent Chairperson had to vacate on being appointed simultaneously in a statutory position in the Government of India, he was kept waiting for three months as notice period and after his departure, the post remained vacant for few more months paralysing the whole system just to debar me as the senior most member to hold that position due to the pressure of the builders lobby. Finally, the other member who was two years junior to me in office got appointed as Chairperson – in -charge by the state government, ignoring my seniority, because I was dubbed as anti-builders.
So far proper functioning of RERA is concerned, a few states like Odisha and Punjab have the precedence of appointing a judicial member from amongst retired district judges, which gives RERA a judicial status. Other states should follow this practice, and if possible, it could be mandated under the law. As regards the unethical practices by some of the Chairpersons and Members affecting the credibility of the institution, it has to be ensured that it does not happen.
To my knowledge, one Chairperson’s wife solicited sponsorship from builders for her own musical programmes and even got publicly appointed as the brand ambassador for a leading builder. This is a bizarre incident of a conflict of interest. The Chairperson and Members should desist from availing any direct or indirect benefits from the promoters in their own name or the name of their family members. They should maintain the ethical standards that nobody should question.
In my humble opinion, the Government of India should fast-track the amendments to the RERA Act to make it more effective and efficient in fulfilling its mandate. Or else the Supreme Court may appoint a high-level committee to study the functioning of RERA in the country and come up with a solution to address the issues plaguing the system. On the other hand, the state governments should come forward to make RERA effective in their respective states by providing necessary assistance, without interference in their autonomy.
(Pradeep Kumar Biswal, retired IAS Officer, is a bilingual poet writing both in Odia and English. His poems are widely anthologized. He is also an editor and translator of repute. Views expressed are Personal)