MahaRERA’s Conciliation Forum Under Fire: A Conflict of Interest?
- Recently MahaRERA has come under a bit of hot water. The reason – its decision to establish a conciliation forum to resolve disputes between homebuyers and builders. But is that not a good decision and, why is there such disagreement over attempts at conciliation? The pushback to this decision comes from the most unexpected source, the homebuyers themselves. Homebuyer’s advocacy groups, particularly the Peoples’ Collective Efforts (FPCE), have raised objections to the forum itself, noting that there might be a ‘conflict of interest’.
- Why The Objection?
FPCE argues that MahaRERA, as a regulatory authority, has overstepped its mandate by both creating and participating in this forum. The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act of 2016 (RERA), which governs such activities, does not explicitly grant the authority to establish or be part of such forums. Instead, it suggests that such forums should be created by consumer or promoter associations, not by the regulatory body itself. - MahaRERA: Not So Objective After All?
A key concern is the composition of the forum, which appears skewed in favour of builders. The FPCE points out that the forum includes three builder organizations as opposed to only one representing consumers. In essence, there will be 2 representatives for consumers and 6 for builders, tipping the balance towards builders. This imbalance, they argue, undermines the forum’s credibility and raises questions about its impartiality. - Objection Noted: Lok Adalats Over Forums?
FPCE President Abhay Upadhyay has written to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, urging them to investigate and issue guidelines that ensure the forum’s independence and fairness. The association also suggests that instead of these forums, Lok Adalats—legal forums with greater authority and credibility—should be promoted as they provide more legally binding resolutions.MahaRERA’s intention to resolve disputes amicably is commendable indeed. But one thing seems to have been overlooked – for any conciliation to be effective, it must be rooted in neutrality. Anything less simply undermines the rights of those the organization aims to protect. After all, justice, in all fairness, should not just be promised, but delivered.
