Latest news with #RameshSingh
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Business
- The Hindu
DDA moves Delhi HC against RERA order for registering housing projects
The Delhi Development Authority has moved the Delhi High Court after the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) in the capital directed the registration of its housing projects. On May 28, the court issued notice to Delhi Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) and the Centre on DDA's plea and asked for their responses. The court has posted the matter for hearing on July 7. Senior advocate Ramesh Singh and advocate Vrinda Kapoor Dev, representing DDA, referred to RERA's order directing it to register projects under Section 3 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Section 3 of RERA mandates registration of real estate project by the promoter before any advertisement, marketing, booking, selling or offering for sale, or inviting persons to purchase in any manner. Further, Section 59 of RERA provides for penalty upon promoter in case of non-registration of the real estate project. Previously, DDA had filed an appeal before the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal challenging the December 20, 2021 order passed by RERA directing it to register all projects under the DDA Housing Scheme 2019 and 2021. The Real Estate Appellate Tribunal had on September 30, 2024 upheld the RERA's decision noting, 'there is a clear stand taken by the Government of India that the provisions of the Act are applicable to the DDA'. In its petition before the high court, DDA argued that it was not a 'promoter' of housing projects under the RERA Act and unlike other promoters and developers, it was not required to mandatorily register under the RERA Act. DDA argued the preamble of the Delhi Development Act established the authority to fundamentally differ from private developers' commercial and profit-motivated objectives and claimed having 'comprehensive in-house mechanisms' for quality control, grievance redressal, and accountability, making additional RERA oversight redundant. 'The statutory scheme of the Delhi Development Act keeps the petitioner distinct from the other developers and promoters of the real estate on account of the fact that the disposal of the developed land and built-up properties are governed by the statutory rules and regulations framed under the DD other promoters and developers as is commonly understood the petitioner does not require mandatory registration....,' the plea said.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
'Not a private builder': DDA moves Delhi HC against Rera order, calls project registration mandate ‘jurisdictional overreach'
New Delhi: In an unusual development, Delhi Development Authority has moved the high court against another statutory body, Rera. Questioning the real estate regulator's competence to order DDA to register the housing projects, the latter stated that it was not a real estate promoter like private builders, but an independent authority whose activities were 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 land owning agency, which also comes under the direct control of the Centre, challenged a provision in Rera which makes it mandatory for all developers, including govt authorities, to register their projects for sale with the respective regulators in the state. DDA termed it an "overreach of jurisdiction" and argued it had to move court "under extraordinary circumstances and for emergent reliefs in view of a palpably unconstitutional, illegal, unauthorised assumption of jurisdiction by Rera, thereby seeking to regulate the petitioner authority, when the latter is not only a creature of another statute, namely the Delhi Development Act, 1957, but also the very subject matter in respect of which the said assumption of jurisdiction has been exercised is regulated under the provisions of the Delhi Development Authority (Management and Disposal of Housing Estates) Regulations, 1968, and Nazul Rules, 1981 framed under section 56 of the DDA Act, 1957. " Senior advocate Ramesh Singh and DDA counsel Vrinda Kapoor Dev argued that Rera authorities failed to recognise that DDA operated under a comprehensive constitutional and parliamentary mandate and was already subject to robust govt oversight, auditing mechanisms and accountability structures. Singh and Kapoor also contended that the Delhi Development Act, 1957 mandated DDA "to promote and secure the development of Delhi according to plan," establishing it as an "instrument of state policy rather than a commercial entity. " The plea said Rera required promoter details like name, address, type, registration and photographs, but DDA was created by a law of Parliament and "has a pivotal role in Delhi's development." While registration under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act requires details of past projects, status, delays, pending cases, land type and payment, the civic agency doesn't need to furnish authenticated copies of approvals and commencement certificates from a competent authority, as it is itself the "competent authority" and sanctions its own layout and plans, it added. Delhi Rera has maintained that those who are in real estate development, whether it is DDA or any other such organisations, must register projects with the regulatory authority, adding that it has powers to take action against them if they fail to do so. Recently, the real estate regulator also ordered DDA to register its super luxury project at Dwarka.
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Business
- Hindustan Times
DDA moves Delhi HC against RERA order for registering housing projects
New Delhi, Jun 10 (PTI) The Delhi Development Authority has moved the Delhi High Court after the Real Estate Regulatory Authority in the capital directed the registration of its housing projects. On May 28, Justice Sachin Datta issued notice to Delhi Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) and the Centre on DDA's plea and asked for their responses. Senior advocate Ramesh Singh and advocate Vrinda Kapoor Dev represented DDA and referred to RERA's 2021 order directing it to register projects under Section 3 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The provision prescribes "prior registration of a real estate project with Real Estate Regulatory Authority". The Real Estate Appellate Tribunal had upheld the RERA decision in September 2024. The petition argued that the statutory exercise of obligations by the DDA was ex-facie not covered under the provisions of Real Estate Act as it was governed by the Delhi Development Authority (Management and Disposal of Housing Estates) Regulations, 1968 and Nazul Rules, 1981. DDA, it said, was not a "promoter" of housing projects under the RERA Act and unlike other promoters and developers, it was not required to mandatorily register under the RERA Act. The plea, as a result, sought RERA's decision to be reined in. DDA argued the preamble of the Delhi Development Act established the authority to fundamentally differ from private developers' commercial and profit-motivated objectives and claimed having "comprehensive in-house mechanisms" for quality control, grievance redressal, and accountability, making additional RERA oversight redundant. "The statutory scheme of the Delhi Development Act keeps the petitioner distinct from the other developers and promoters of the real estate on account of the fact that the disposal of the developed land and built-up properties are governed by the statutory rules and regulations framed under the DD other promoters and developers as is commonly understood the petitioner does not require mandatory registration....," the plea said. The matter would be heard on July 7.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
DDA moves Delhi HC, says RERA cannot issue it directions
NEW DELHI: In an unusual development, Delhi Development Authority has moved the high court against another statutory body, Rera. Questioning the real estate regulator's competence to order DDA to register the housing projects, the latter stated that it was not a real estate promoter like private builders, but an independent authority whose activities were 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 land owning agency, which also comes under the direct control of the Centre, challenged a provision in Rera which makes it mandatory for all developers, including govt authorities, to register their projects for sale with the respective regulators in the state. DDA termed it an "overreach of jurisdiction" and argued it had to move court "under extraordinary circumstances and for emergent reliefs in view of a palpably unconstitutional, illegal, unauthorised assumption of jurisdiction by Rera, thereby seeking to regulate the petitioner authority, when the latter is not only a creature of another statute, namely the Delhi Development Act , 1957, but also the very subject matter in respect of which the said assumption of jurisdiction has been exercised is regulated under the provisions of the Delhi Development Authority (Management and Disposal of Housing Estates) Regulations, 1968, and Nazul Rules, 1981 framed under section 56 of the DDA Act, 1957." Senior advocate Ramesh Singh and DDA counsel Vrinda Kapoor Dev argued that Rera authorities failed to recognise that DDA operated under a comprehensive constitutional and parliamentary mandate and was already subject to robust govt oversight, auditing mechanisms and accountability structures. Singh and Kapoor also contended that the Delhi Development Act, 1957 mandated DDA "to promote and secure the development of Delhi according to plan," establishing it as an "instrument of state policy rather than a commercial entity." The plea said Rera required promoter details like name, address, type, registration and photographs, but DDA was created by a law of Parliament and "has a pivotal role in Delhi's development." While registration under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act requires details of past projects, status, delays, pending cases, land type and payment, the civic agency doesn't need to furnish authenticated copies of approvals and commencement certificates from a competent authority, as it is itself the "competent authority" and sanctions its own layout and plans, it added. Delhi Rera has maintained that those who are in real estate development, whether it is DDA or any other such organisations, must register projects with the regulatory authority, adding that it has powers to take action against them if they fail to do so. Recently, the real estate regulator also ordered DDA to register its super luxury project at Dwarka.
Time of India
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Ambedkar Jayanti row: Uttarakhand high court halts transfer of professor couple
DEHRADUN: Uttarakhand HC has ordered a stay on the transfer of a professor couple from Uttarkashi Degree College to Pithoragarh Degree College and paused the departmental investigation against them. Dr Ramesh Singh and his wife Dr Vinita Singh, both associate professors at the same college, had filed a petition in the court saying Uttarkashi Degree College took retaliatory action against them for opposing the college's decision to change the date of Ambedkar Jayanti celebrations at the institute. They said the higher education department had instructed colleges to remain open and celebrate Dr B R Ambedkar's birth anniversary on April 14. But acting principal Madhu Thapliyal rescheduled the celebration to April 12. Following the couple's objection, Thapliyal placed Singh on extended leave, citing "false sexual harassment allegations from two years ago". The court fixed June 11 for the next hearing. tnn
