12 UP RERA employees sacked over doubtful conduct in a year
According to UP RERA chairman Sanjay Bhoosreddy, an affidavit of integrity is also taken from every officer and employee in RERA. The number of officers and other staff in UP RERA is very less, although the nature of work is sensitive. The regulatory authority also provides training to all employees to improve their skills.
According to the officials, CCTV cameras have been installed at all rooms in the RERA office and the movement of employees and visitors is also monitored by senior officers.
Following the policy of zero tolerance towards indiscipline and misconduct, RERA has also sent a reference to the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh in one case for action under the Advocates Act, 1961
The RERA headquarters is in Lucknow since 2017 and the NCR regional office in Greater Noida since 2018.
RERA was established to fix the accountability of developers of real estate projects and to protect the interests of consumers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
13 hours ago
- Time of India
How homebuyers can protect themselves from being scammed by builder-bank nexus when buying under-construction houses
Devil in the details Academy Empower your mind, elevate your skills Games builders play A cosy club Builder stops paying EMIs. Bank holds buyer liable (since the loan is in buyer's name). Buyer must start paying EMI, even if... — The house is not delivered. — The builder is insolvent or absconding. If staying on rent, buyer pays EMI + rent. lCredit score gets damaged due to missed payments. What should homebuyers do? Ensure the project is registered with RERA and check its status online. Avoid schemes that lack escrow accounts. Demand clear documentation of payment schedules and possession timelines. Seek independent legal and financial advice before committing. Prefer projects backed by reputed banks that conduct thorough due diligence. It was an offer homebuyers could not resist. Buy a pricey apartment for a small upfront payment of 5-10%. Borrow the rest from a lender with an added sweetener: your EMI payments are deferred until you get possession of the flat. The developer agrees to bear the interest burden until the buyer receives the keys to the house. What could go wrong? A lot, as it turns widespread defaults by cashstrapped developers on their commitments, banks have been demanding repayment from purchasers, despite homes remaining undelivered. Following petitions from thousands of aggrieved homebuyers, the Supreme Court this year directed a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into a housing scam by builders and banks. The CBI in July filed multiple cases against various Delhi/NCR-based builders, as well as banks, for duping homebuyers. This may be just the tip of the iceberg. The rot runs deeper. Real estate developers have, over the years, employed a wide array of tactics to attract buyers. Beyond freebies, discounts and creative sales pitches, builders have also offered convenient financing options promising 'no EMI till possession' subvention schemes and deferred payment plans linked to construction progress. Akhil Rathi, Head, Financial Advisory at 1 Finance, says, 'Subvention and deferred payment schemes aim to reduce the initial financial burden for homebuyers, especially those currently paying rent, by offering lower upfront costs and delayed EMIs .'However, there is often a devil residing within the fine print. In a subvention scheme , a tri-party agreement is executed among the homebuyer, the builder and the lender. The builder agrees to pay the pre-EMIs till possession. Even so, the actual borrower remains the homebuyer. So if the builder defaults on the interest payments, it is the homebuyer who is exposed. If he can't repay the loan, the buyer's credit rating the offer clearly specifies a timeline for this arrangement. Some developers promise to cover the interest cost only for the initial 18 to 24 months. 'Subvention plans are always timed. The builder offers to pay interest only for a specified number of years,' indicates Adhil Shetty, CEO, Beyond this period, the buyer is obligated to make EMI payments even if the project is not completed. Rathi adds, 'Builders also charge a much higher price for houses if bought through a subvention scheme. This hidden cost defeats its purpose.'As many buyers have discovered, delays in under-construction houses are a common occurrence in India. Thousands of homebuyers across Delhi/NCR, Mumbai and Pune have fallen victims to this. Data analytics firm PropEquity found in 2024 that one in five under-construction houses, totalling over 5 lakh units, remained undelivered as 1,981 projects across 44 cities were stalled in the preceding eight the remaining four under-construction houses were delivered after a substantial delay of 3-4 years. 'Construction delays are a standard feature of Indian realty for several reasons. This means that the subvention plan leaves borrowers high and dry in case of a serious project delay,' remarks be sure, the RBI had banned banks from entering into such arrangements. It had also barred lenders from making upfront disbursements to builders in underconstruction projects. Loans must be disbursed in tranches linked to construction progress. However, several NBFCs and fintech platforms continue to tie up with builders to offer variants of such construction-linked plan (CLP), a staple offering among builders, has proven to be a mirage. Under this arrangement, the buyer pays in tranches, linked to construction milestones. The builder receives payment only when the work is completed, supposedly reducing the risk for buyers. Surely, it is in the builder's interest to execute the project on time?Not quite. Experts point to a critical flaw in construction-linked plans. These are often not aligned with the builder's cash flow. 'The payment plan is designed in a manner that you would have to pay 90% of the apartment price upon 'laying of the top floor of the building'. However, that is not how the project expenses are allocated. By the time the structure is complete, the builder usually has spent approximately 40-50% of the project cost. The rest 60% of the money is needed later,' observed Anurag Singh, Founder, Ansid Capital, in a recent post on X. Once the builder has received a majority of the project cost (via CLP), he slows down construction deliberately. He has already pocketed a sizable chunk of profits, but his costs are yet to materialise or flow out. He stops construction rather than pay for the remaining work. That is why buyers often find projects getting stalled in later stages, not initially. In the meantime, the builder diverts attention to new launches. Money received under CLP for Project A is diverted to buy land or finance construction in Project B or C. If Project A is delayed or abandoned, the builder has still made his in five under-construction houses were undelivered across major cities and towns in are notorious for gaming this arrangement. A builder claims a milestone (say, 10th or 15th slab) is complete even when actual work is pending. If a lender is involved, they may furnish forged completion certificates to get the lender to release the next tranche. This results in front-loaded payments even when the construction activity lenders carry out due diligence while choosing builders? Surely banks would not want any erosion in the value of their collateral. On the contrary, lenders have been lax in this regard. Many banks don't lend to builders (other than grade A) directly, given the risk in the real estate business. Instead, they offer home loans to individual buyers, which indirectly fund the builder. 'Essentially, the consumer is financing the builder in the name of 'construction-linked plan',' observes Singh. 'So a developer, to whom no bank lends money, can actually get easy finance from the buyers at 0% interest, while the borrowers pay the EMIs with interest,' he system has conveniently kept the builders well fed. In many cases, builders and lenders have pre-arranged cosy tieups. Banks sanction loans for new projects without batting an eyelid, even if these are missing clearances from local authorities. Some lenders may skip physical inspection of construction progress entirely, relying on the builder's documents. This lack of hygiene checks is because banks have no real skin in the game, say experts. How so? If the builder falters and the house (collateral) value shrinks, the bank can recover its value through auction and yet hold the homeowner liable for the outstanding builders and lenders have led homebuyers into a storm. 'Builders have often exploited subvention schemes to attract buyers without ensuring timely delivery. In many cases, they were used to mask delays or financial instability. Banks, too, have played a role by approving loans without adequate scrutiny of the project's viability, especially during periods of high market activity,' remarks Ravi Shankar Singh, Managing Director, Residential Transaction Services, Colliers India. 'Builders used these schemes to collect funds early while construction lagged. Banks, aiming to grow home loan portfolios, at times overlooked due diligence,' suggests a tri-party agreement project gets delayed or builder guardrails are now in place through the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act (RERA), but these lack sufficient enforcement mechanisms. This encourages builders to play the devil with impunity. 'A law is only as strong as its enforcement. RERA orders have no enforcement power. Even if you win interest penalty for delayed completion, you can take that victory certificate where you want to. The builder is not going to pay anything,' Singh laments in his post. 'We created a system that was designed to finance the extremely low-credit builder and rob the consumer of his lifetime earnings with no recourse to justice,' he unsuspecting homebuyers are now paying a hefty price for pursuing their housing aspirations. The dream abode has turned out to be a millstone around the neck rather than a means for achieving financial freedom. For those looking to buy, vigilance remains the only Pharande, Managing Director of Pharande Spaces, insists, 'Buying a home should be driven by at least as much awareness as sentiment. Homebuyers must always approach a real estate deal in the spirit of caveat emptor—buyer beware.'Verify the builder's track record and financial stability. Ensure the project is registered with RERA and check its status online. Seek independent legal and financial advice before committing. Shetty avers, 'Scrutinise all the documents, approvals, sanctions, etc. It does not matter whether the lender or the builder have done the legal legwork. As a buyer, you are the one investing your and your family's emotional, physical, and financial well-being in the property. So make sure you have a lawyer to make all the checks on your behalf.'Do not take blind comfort in easy financing offers. 'Subvention schemes and deferred payment plans are means by which buyers can pay for their homes in a more flexible manner, based on how far along the construction is. While this makes it easier for them to pay, such schemes are only useful if they are clear and have explicit terms, and if the developer can be relied upon to complete the project as per schedule,' says Pharande. Buyers should clarify who will be responsible if the builder misses interest payments, as such lapses can lead to missed payments that negatively impact the buyer's credit score, even though the disbursed funds were for construction, not personal use, insists the builder's track record and financial IndiaWatch out for front-loaded payment schedules. Paying 70-80% of the flat cost within 18 months while the project is scheduled for completion years later is a red flag. 'Make sure the payment schedule reflects the stages for actual completion of your flat and also till the handing over of all the legal documents like no-objection certificate (NOC) and occupation certificate,' asserts Shetty. You do not want the bank to advance the entire amount even if the entire post-completion paperwork is pending. This change needs to be made in the sale deed before it is signed and registered, he says. Further, insist on third-party verification of construction milestones before any payment. Relying solely on builder statements or certificates increases don't fall for incentives offered by the builder while overlooking crucial aspects of the Shankar Singh of Colliers asserts, 'It's important to focus on the fundamentals, location, builder credibility, legal clearances, and construction quality, rather than flashy incentives.
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Bar council puts 16 lawyers on notice for bench hunting
The privilege committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana has put on notice 16 lawyers, including two senior advocates, of the high court over alleged attempts of 'bench hunting' to obtain a favourable order in an alleged case of corruption involving a Gurugram-based realtor and former special CBI court judge in Haryana. The privilege committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana has asked the 16 lawyers to respond by August 16. (Representational photo) The committee sought responses from senior advocate and Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi and former attorney general Mukul Rohatgi, stating their responses are necessary to 'fairly and comprehensively adjudicate the matter in hand'. The committee, chaired by Raj Kumar Chauhan, was constituted on August 4 by BCPH chairman Rakesh Gupta after members of the bar council pointed out that some advocates of the Punjab and Haryana high court were resorting to bench hunting to secure 'favourable orders' from a particular bench or avoiding to appear before another. Bench hunting or forum shopping refers to petitioners managing to get their cases heard by a particular judge or bench to ensure a favourable order. 'This committee is of the prima facie view that there appears to be foul play on the part of certain advocates who appeared on behalf of Roop Bansal, a real estate builder, and it appears these advocates may have manipulated procedural rules for convenience and gain,' the privilege committee observed after going through the record of the case. 'It is painful and disturbing for the committee to discuss here how tactfully, systematically and in an organised manner, some of the advocates made efforts to hunt the bench. From the records, prima facie it appears that JK Singla, advocate, orchestrated the game plan. But it is highly unbelievable, that this can be done singularly, rather it has been done in an organised manner and there might be some big ingenious minded advocates behind the curtains, which has to be unearthed,' it said. The council is the statutory body with 1.5 lakh members across two states and Chandigarh. It has regulatory control over the Bars and regulates entry into the legal profession and also adjudicates complaints against lawyers. It was established under the Advocates Act, 1961, and is headquartered at Chandigarh. The advocates, who have been served notice through Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association, are JK Singla, Sidharth Bhardwaj, Aditya Aggarwal, Gagandeep Singh, Anmol Chandan, Baljeet Beniwal, Harsh Sharma, Sauhard Singh, Rupender Singh, Ankit Yadav, Ashim Singla, Aakash Sharma, Bindu, APS Shergil and two senior advocates Rakesh Nehra and Puneet Bali. All of them have been told to respond by August 16. The petition was filed by real estate firm M3M's director Roop Bansal seeking quashing of an FIR filed by the Haryana anti-corruption bureau in April 2023 against himself and others, including former special CBI court judge Sudhir Parmar. The case stems from an April 2023 case, registered against Sudhir Parmar, Roop Bansal, and others under Sections 7, 8, 11 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B of IPC for offences relating to a public servant being bribed, a public servant taking undue advantage without consideration from person concerned in proceedings or business transacted by such public servant, criminal misconduct by a public servant and criminal conspiracy. Sudhir Parmar, who was then special CBI judge, Panchkula, was accused of alleged favouritism towards Bansal and others who were accused in FIRs being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Enforcement Directorate, pending before his court. Bansal's case was withdrawn by chief justice Sheel Nagu through an administrative decision in May from a judge and assigned it to himself after some 'complaints'. While hearing this petition, the chief justice had orally hinted at possible cases of 'bench hunting' in these proceedings during an open court hearing. However, subsequently, the chief justice also recused from hearing the case. The case is now being heard by the bench of justice Manjari Nehru Kaul. The committee asserted that 'legal ethics are not optional'. 'They are sacred. Upholding the dignity of this noble profession requires moral courage, compassion, and unwavering commitment to truth,' it said, adding to ascertain whether these advocates have indulged at any stage in bench hunting, the notices are being issued to these lawyers.
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Indian Express
Bar Council issues notices to 16 lawyers over alleged bench-hunting in Roop Bansal case
The Privilege Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana has initiated proceedings against 16 lawyers, including two senior advocates, over alleged attempts to manipulate the bench assignment process in a high-profile corruption case involving Gurugram-based real estate developer Roop Bansal. In an order dated August 7, 2025, the Committee directed the advocates to appear in person or through counsel on August 16 at 3 pm, along with their replies. The list includes Senior Advocates Rakesh Nehra and Puneet Bali, besides Advocates J.K. Singla, Sidharth Bhardwaj, Aditya Aggarwal, Gagandeep Singh, Anmol Chandan, Baljeet Beniwal, Harsh Sharma, Sauhard Singh, Rupender Singh, Ankit Yadav, Ashim Singla, Aakash Sharma, Ms. Bindu, and APS Shergil. The move follows observations made by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CRM-M-19843-2025 (Roop Bansal vs State of Haryana), where Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, in the open court, flagged concerns over 'bench shopping' and warned that such conduct was 'destroying the Bar.' The Indian Express had reported that the Bench had asked Bansal's legal team to produce the advocate who filed a fresh plea in the matter 'just to get the case out of a particular Bench.' The Committee, chaired by Raj Kumar Chauhaan, said the matter was taken up suo motu to 'uphold the dignity of the legal profession, ensure the maintenance of legal ethics, and discharge the responsibilities entrusted under law.' It further wrote, 'In the battle of justice and injustice and in between the righteous and wrong, in Mahabharata, the silence of Bhishma and Drona in the Court of Hastinapur, during Draupadi's humiliation, reveals a timeless truth – when those trained in law and morality remain silent in the face of injustice, the law itself collapses.' Citing legal maxims and historical analogies, it likened any attempt to subvert judicial processes to an 'invasion of the Temple of Justice,' comparable to 'the desecration of the Somnath Temple in the 11th century.' From the records, the Committee said it appeared that Advocate J.K. Singla 'orchestrated the game plan' but that it was 'highly unbelievable' such an effort could be carried out alone. 'There might be some big ingenious mind advocates behind the curtains, which has to be unearthed,' it noted, terming the alleged conduct as 'tactful, systematic and in an organized manner.' The order invoked Section 6(c) and (d) of the Advocates Act, 1961, empowering the Bar Council to take action in cases involving professional misconduct. It also acknowledged the 'complexity of tactics such as bench hunting, bar hunting or forum shopping' allegedly adopted by some lawyers and businessmen 'for ulterior motives.' The Committee said it would also seek responses from senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi 'to fairly and comprehensively adjudicate the matter.' Additionally, it invited information, complaints, or any material from advocates and affected persons via its official email and WhatsApp number. Emphasising that 'legal ethics are not optional, they are sacred,' the order warned that any lawyer who manipulates the judicial process 'for convenience and gain' is 'a menace to society.' Quoting Gandhi, Ambedkar, Roscoe Pound, Lord Denning and Justice Louis Brandeis, the Committee underlined that lawyers are 'custodians of justice' and 'guardians of constitutional morality.' 'The Bar Council cannot sit idle as a mere spectator. It is the duty of the Committee to trace out the rotten apple/apples from the basket, before all get rotten,' the order concluded. Bar Council Secretary Gagandeep Jammu, when contacted, said, 'As Secretary of the Bar Council, I will be forwarding these notices to the advocates concerned on the allegations of bar shopping. If the Bar Council is satisfied with their explanation, it will close the matter, if not, it has the power to suspend or even cancel their licences.' The notice further read, 'This Committee is also of the view that for the fair inquiry and to look into the unethical measures adopted by some of the advocates, let the information/complaints/any kind of material, if any, be taken from the advocates and the affected persons.' The matter will be heard at 3 pm on August 16, at the Bar Council's Chandigarh office.
