Representative Image
‘BDA not under purview of K-RERA’
Bengaluru
In what could be viewed as a setback for the site allottees of Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout (NPKL), the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) advocate claimed that the authority does not fall under the purview of the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-RERA). The advocates argued this during a hearing on NPKL’s petition against the BDA on Friday, June 13.
According to sources privy to the meeting, the advocates cited a certain court case stating that the BDA does not come under the ambit of K-RERA. The advocate also requested K-RERA to provide time to make further submissions that were referred to in the argument. The NPKL residents were unhappy with this development as it may go against their interest. The hearing was chaired by K-RERA Chairman, Rakesh Singh. The next hearing is posted for July 7.
This development comes at a time when the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has moved the Delhi High Court against Delhi RERA, questioning the real estate regulator’s competence to order DDA to register housing projects. The DDA in its plea stated that the authority is not a real estate promoter like private builders, but an independent authority whose activities are covered under the DDA Act and related Nazul rules. Last month, a bench of Justice Sachin Dutta issued notice to RERA and the central Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, seeking their stand on the DDA’s petition. The BDA argument indicates that it is taking cover under this.
Rakesh Singh, talking to BLR.POST, said, “In my opinion, BDA comes under the purview of K-RERA. However, I must accept that RERA was a nascent body when it was first formed, and then no one may have thought about bringing BDA under this regulatory authority.”
The hearing of the NPKL complaints by K-RERA was first resumed after a gap of two and a half years on March 23. The last hearing was held in 2022. After resuming, the regulatory body conducted multiple hearings. In one of the hearings held on April 9, site owners had presented complaints and requested compensation for the delay in completing the infrastructure. Singh had also criticised the BDA for the delay.
It is a pity that this is being brought up now.If this is the case how and why did BDA register under RERA and why did authorities conduct hearings all these years?It is another matter that BDA is totally non compliant with RERA.
If this is so RERA must compensate allottees for wasting our time,energy and money for so many years and get us the relief we are seeking from BDA