Maharashtra’s real estate regulatory authority, MahaRERA, established in 2017, is currently grappling with a substantial backlog of unresolved complaints. Eight years after its inception, 7,310 out of 29,374 filed complaints remain pending, prompting appeals from homebuyers, legal professionals, and consumer advocates for quicker resolutions and more stringent enforcement of its directives.
Despite having resolved 21,888 cases and conducting both online and offline hearings, the increasing volume of pending cases has caused concern among consumer groups. These groups emphasize the critical need for appointing additional adjudicating officers and establishing regional benches to effectively manage the growing caseload.
MahaRERA holds the distinction of registering over 50,000 real estate projects, the highest among state regulators, with approximately half of these located within the Mumbai Metropolitan Region and Pune. However, industry stakeholders contend that this extensive operational reach is not adequately supported by the current capacity to address consumer grievances.
Presently, MahaRERA’s operational structure includes a single chairperson, two members, and three adjudicating officers. Godfrey Pimenta, an activist from the Watchdog Foundation, pointed out that this limited framework is insufficient to handle the sheer volume of complaints. Pimenta noted that some complaints can take two to three years, and in exceptional instances, up to five years for resolution, despite the legal requirement for them to be addressed within six months. He stressed the urgent necessity of increasing the number of MahaRERA members to efficiently clear the accumulating backlog.
Shirish Deshpande, chairman of the Mumbai Grahak Panchayat, highlighted that Section 20 of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act provides the state with the autonomy to appoint more MahaRERA chairpersons and establish additional benches. He expressed his disappointment regarding the current situation, stating, “It’s been eight years since MahaRERA was established, and yet we are witnessing an alarming backlog of cases, which is deeply disappointing for those who once supported its creation”.
Deshpande further clarified that complaints typically fall into two main categories:
- Homebuyers seeking to withdraw from a project and requesting a refund with interest due to delays in receiving possession.
- Homebuyers who wish to proceed with the project despite delays but seek interest on the amount they have paid, as stipulated by Section 18 of the Act.
He underscored that in both these scenarios, the authority should be able to issue orders promptly, as the applicable interest rate is already defined within the RERA rules, allowing for expeditious resolution of such matters.
