Mumbai: While MahaRERA has issued show-cause notices to 9,177 housing projects across Maharashtra and imposed penalties of over Rs 15 crore for failing to update their quarterly progress reports (QPRs), questions are being raised about the regulator’s ability to scrutinise disclosures made by developers and monitor compliance with provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA).Lawyers and housing activists argue that MahaRERA lacks the infrastructure and mechanisms needed to systematically verify self-declarations, certificates and disclosures submitted by promoters. They have suggested the regulator adopt random inspections, independent verification and technology-driven monitoring, including the use of artificial intelligence, to track project compliance. According to them, scrutiny remains largely complaint-driven, with investigations often initiated only after grievances are filed by homebuyers or other stakeholders.MahaRERA officials, though, contend that verifying every submission made by developers is practically impossible given that nearly 54,000 projects are registered with the authority across the state. They maintain that the regulator’s primary focus is on grievance redressal and providing relief to homebuyers. Officials said complaints are now being heard within 15 days to a month due to measures introduced by the authority.Legal experts and activists point out that while MahaRERA verifies certain documents at the project registration stage, there is little clarity on whether the disclosures and certifications uploaded by promoters are regularly cross-verified thereafter. MahaRERA began scrutinising commencement certificates submitted by developers before granting project registrations only after it was found that several developers in the Kalyan-Dombivli region secured registrations using forged documents. In a recent case, allottees of an ongoing project in Santacruz found that the project’s progress was last updated on the MahaRERA portal in 2024.Shirish Deshpande, chairman of Mumbai Grahak Panchayat, said under RERA, once 51% of flats are booked, promoters are required to facilitate the formation of a society of homebuyers, and after obtaining an Occupation Certificate, execute conveyance in favour of the society within three months.Deshpande questioned whether MahaRERA has penalised developers for failing to comply with these provisions and asked how many developers actually execute conveyance within the stipulated period. “Under the model agreement, promoters are bound to pay interest for delays, and why are such payments not initiated automatically once delays occur? MahaRERA must ensure, with the help of technology, that developers automatically pay the allottees interest for every month of delay. This will substantially reduce the load of complaints piling up in MahaRERA,” Deshpande said.Advocate Nilesh Gala said recurring compliance failures expose a structural weakness in RERA’s fund-protection framework. Under Section 4(2)(l)(D) of the Act, 70% of the money collected from homebuyers must be deposited in a designated project account and can be withdrawn only against certifications issued by an architect, engineer and chartered accountant regarding project progress. However, Gala noted that the chartered accountant’s Form 3 certificate is based on records provided by the promoter and is not independently cross-verified by the regulator. This creates the possibility of funds being withdrawn or diverted without corresponding construction progress, potentially exposing homebuyers and lenders to risk.Referring to the insolvency of a Chembur project in which homebuyers had collectively invested around Rs 800 crore, Gala said the case highlighted the dangers of inadequate oversight. He suggested that MahaRERA subject a sample of Form 3 certifications to independent counter-audits by empanelled chartered accountants rather than accepting them at face value. Furthermore, a designated bank holding the escrow account should be made an active gatekeeper, releasing funds only after verifying the certified percentage of completion against the engineer’s and architect’s reports, and not on the promoter’s instruction alone. Gala also recommended reconciling withdrawals from designated accounts with quarterly progress updates uploaded on the RERA portal and triggering red flags where financial withdrawals do not match physical construction progress. Professionals issuing false certifications, he said, should face blacklisting and referral to their professional bodies.RTI activist Jeetendra Ghadge, who said he was denied information regarding discrepancies in Form 3 certificates, violations of designated bank account provisions, physical verification of project progress and action against chartered accountants allegedly issuing false certifications, sought verification of the disclosures made by developers.Advocate Godfrey Pimenta, who represents allottees in a Vakola project that has not been updated on the MahaRERA portal since May 2024, said promoters are required under Section 11 of the Act and applicable MahaRERA regulations to periodically upload architects’ certificates, engineers’ certificates, chartered accountants’ certificates, construction progress reports, financial disclosures and other project-related information.While welcoming MahaRERA’s recent compliance drive against projects that failed to submit mandatory QPRs and disclosures, Pimenta said disclosure alone does not guarantee accuracy. Homebuyers and stakeholders have no independent means of verifying whether information uploaded by promoters reflects the actual status of construction and financial progress on-site. As the sector regulator, he said, MahaRERA should introduce a system of random inspections and verification of disclosures against physical project progress, while also using AI-based tools for monitoring.According to advocate Avinash Pawar, MahaRERA compliances are just self-declarations by the promoters, which cannot ensure compliance of the agreements done with the flat purchasers.Advocate Anil D’Souza said that, like other regulators, RERA imposes several compliance obligations on promoters, including quarterly, half-yearly and annual reports and project progress disclosures. He said stricter monitoring by the regulatory machinery may be necessary, while adding that compliance requirements and scrutiny of project registrations have become more stringent under the current MahaRERA administration.Defending the authority, MahaRERA officials said its mandate is to regulate the sector and provide redressal to homebuyers rather than undertake continuous micro-level monitoring of projects. They maintained that MahaRERA neither has the wherewithal nor the mandate to carry out detailed, ongoing scrutiny of every real estate project in the state.
