SC grants states four weeks for response to deviations in RERA rules

SC granted four weeks more to states and UTs who have not filed their reply to the deviations and variations pointed out in the implementation of the RERA Act

The Supreme Court on Friday granted four weeks more to states and Union Territories who have not filed their reply to the deviations and variations pointed out in the implementation of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) (RERA) Act, 2016, and corresponding rules and laws in their jurisdiction.

A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and Hima Kohli warned that if the requisite responses are not filed within the stipulated time, principal secretaries of housing and urban development shall be present in court to explain the delay.

The top court noted that 13 states and two UTs have filed their responses to the plea.

 

"Despite the previous order, requiring the states/UTs to file their responses, certain states have not submitted their responses. They shall do positively within four weeks, failing which the principal secretaries in housing and urban development shall be present in court," the bench said while posting the matter after eight weeks.

The top court was hearing a plea filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay seeking the implementation of a model builder-buyer agreement across the country.

The advocate said that there should be a model agreement prepared by the Centre as some states have it and some don't, and there is no uniformity in those agreements.

The PIL has sought direction to the Centre to frame model pacts for builders and agent buyers to protect customers and bring transparency in the realty sector in line with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) Act, 2016.

On January 17, the top court had emphasised the need for a model builder-buyer agreement to safeguard the interest of middle-class home buyers and asked the Centre to consider framing uniform rules under the provisions of RERA.

The top court had said that it wants that instead of leaving it to the States, the Centre makes the model builder-buyer agreement and model agent-buyer agreement which shall be applicable for the whole of the country.

It had said that the whole purpose of the present PIL is that there should be a model builder-buyer agreement which will be formulated by the central advisory council so that there is some uniformity in the basic terms and conditions and the flat buyers are not exploited.

On October 4 last year, the top court said it was important for the country to have a model builder-buyer agreement in the real estate sector for consumer protection because developers try to put numerous clauses in it, which common people may not be aware of.