Provisions and Implementation of Real Estate Regulatory Acts in Various States of India - A Review

Abstract

The construction industry in India is a vital component of the country’s economic development, serving as the second largest employer and contributing approximately 6.5 per cent to the GDP. Despite its significance, the sector has been largely unregulated and disorganised. To address these issues and curb the increasing malpractices, the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act of 2016, commonly known as RERA, was introduced. The primary objective of RERA is to regulate and promote the real estate industry efficiently and transparently while protecting the interests of home buyers. The Act came into force on May 1, 2016, initially notifying 52 of its 92 sections, with the remaining provisions implemented on May 1, 2017. Real estate governance in India is characterised by a combination of central and state-level laws. RERA mandates state governments to establish implementation rules within six months of the Act’s commencement. This paper aims to investigate the regulatory provisions enacted by various states to govern the real estate sector, particularly in the case of Uttar Pradesh (UP). The analysis shows how these regulatory frameworks deviate from the Central Act, hampering consumer interests and the effectiveness of regulation in the states.

Keywords

Real estate, Real Estate Regulation and Development Act, 2016, UPRERA.

Introduction

Real estate is considered as a major revenue-generating sector in India, comprising the housing, commercial, retail, and hospitality sectors (Tiwari, Chauhan 2020). For this reason, it has a significant impact on the country’s economy and overall growth. The sector’s estimated projected growth is approximately 25–30 per cent in the coming decade, mainly due to rapid urbanisation and population explosion in the country. However, the industry is highly sensitive to changes in government policy. As these policies can affect the industry both positively and negatively, their impacts can sometimes be unpredictable.

In India, real estate is both a ‘central’ and ‘state’ subject. Granted Article 246 under the Constitution of India, ‘land’ is a state subject, while ‘transfer of property other than agricultural lands’ is a concurrent subject on which both Parliament (Centre) and state legislatures can enact laws. Despite recent growth, the real estate sector has been largely unregulated from a consumer protection standpoint, leading to numerous real estate scams, highlighting the fact that the existing consumer protection laws are more curative than preventive (Tiwari, Chauhan 2020).

Additionally, the need for regulation arises from the increasing malpractices in the real estate sector, where consumers face significant risks like delayed delivery, lack of clear property titles, and poor facilities before deciding to purchase a property (Sharma, 2018). Consequently, the sector is expected to be operated in a transparent, accountable, and disciplined way. Given the necessity to supervise the industry and protect the interests of all participants, the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act of 2016 was introduced.

The paper examines real estate regulation in several key countries worldwide and also explores the implementation of RERA in various states of India, particularly concentrating on Uttar Pradesh to showcase the primary real estate policy practices, thereby providing insights into notable advantages and disadvantages, setting the stage for future research opportunities concerning UPRERA.

Background Study

Overview of Real Estate Regulation in Various Countries

Recognising the significant contribution of real estate in stimulating economic development, numerous countries worldwide have implemented focused strategies aimed at establishing a strong and flourishing real estate industry. These strategies prioritise the development of effective policies and regulatory frameworks, ensuring excellence in execution, and making the best use of technology. Dubai serves as a prime example of effective regulation through the Dubai Land Department (DLD), which manages real estate legislation and has launched a smart application for immediate access to information about licensed brokers, thereby improving transparency; additionally, Dubai encompasses all real estate ventures that are managed by the Dubai Land Department. The Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) under the DLD, along with other organisations, enhances consumer protection and strengthens market trust through well-defined contracts. For instance, in the U.S., only registered agents are involved in both primary and secondary sales transactions. Furthermore, in China, the State Department of Real Estate, ‘New State 10′ regulation places an accountability framework on the local government in an effort to stabilise local real estate prices, while Singapore features clearly outlined extension fees that developers must pay for project delays: 8 per cent of the land purchase price for the first-year extension, 16 per cent for the second year, and 24 per cent for the third year. This highlights the formalisation of real estate sectors, emphasising the necessity for transparency, accountability, and consumer protection to nurture strong real estate markets. Additionally, countries like Germany have implemented stringent tenant protection laws, ensuring stability in rental markets, while Canada is increasingly focusing on foreign buyer taxes to curb speculation and maintain housing affordability.

In conclusion, the examination of real estate regulatory frameworks in various countries, such as Dubai, the United States, China, and Singapore, highlights the importance of transparency, accountability, and consumer protection in fostering a thriving real estate market. By adopting best practices like usage of smart application like RERA apps, mandatory registration for real estate brokers for primary and secondary transactions in real estate, and control of rates to ULBs, India can improve upon its regulatory systems to ensure fair, efficient, and robust real estate markets that may protect investors and consumers alike.

RERA and its Implementation in Various States of India

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA Act) was enacted in India to enhance regulation and transparency in the real estate sector and to ensure sale of plot, apartment or building protecting consumer interests and facilitating speedy, transparent and efficient dispute resolution.

The RERA mandates that each individual state must establish its own State Real Estate Regulatory Authority (SRERA). Although RERA is designed to function at a national level, individual states have been granted the authority to facilitate the effective enforcement of the Act. In compliance with RERA, it is the responsibility of each state to implement four essential activities:

-Formulate official regulations in accordance with RERA.

-Establish a RERA Authority tasked with the enforcement of legal provisions while ensuring transparency in real estate transactions.

-Develop a specialised Tribunal to adjudicate grievances and provide timely resolutions.

-Launch an online platform to gain buyers’ confidence.

Notwithstanding the foundational framework that has been established, the implementation of RERA by states continues to exhibit variability. It is critical to examine the additional measures undertaken by SRERAs and to identify any existing gaps within the same. Consequently, a comprehensive analysis was conducted through literature reviews and semi-structured interviews with stakeholders, including government officials, real estate agents, developers, and members of the public, were taken in order to derive conclusions for the research paper under the four major components of SRERA:

-Establishment of authority,

-Setting rules and ensuring implementation,

-Redressal via RERA,

-Internet portal functioning of RERA.

Establishment of RERA Authority

According to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Government of India (MoHUA), all States and Union Territories have received notifications under the RERA, 26 states and Union territories have notified rules and have setup a website under Central RERA Act as showcased in Figure 1. While Interim RERA has been established in only four States, the six states and UTs have still to set up their authority (BCG, 2023; IIHS, 2023).

Figure 1: Pie Chart showcasing the SRERA Setup progress in INDIA.

Additionally, it can be observed that, the ten States have contributed to 90 per cent of total Project Registrations. As depicted in Table 1, Maharashtra oversees the charts with 43,729 projects, comprising a massive 35 per cent of all Indian registrations. Gujarat, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Chhattisgarh round out the top ten. These states have collectively played a vital role in driving the real estate market forward, and their contributions will no doubt continue as this industry continues to flourish. In matter of complaint resolving, Uttar Pradesh leads the pack with an impressive 44,763 resolved grievances which form 38.09 per cent of the total grievances received in the State. This is followed by Haryana, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka.

Looking at the implementation progress of RERA, it is clear that the scheme has made significant strides in many states and has resulted in substantial progress in resolving complaints filed by real estate investors. While the number of registered projects or agents alone cannot definitively measure implementation success, it serves as a valuable indicator of quantitative progress, raising awareness and fostering greater knowledge, ultimately paving the way for enhanced qualitative outcomes, and focusing towards improvement and development to ensure that the scheme reaches its full potential.

Table 1: RERA 2016, Implementation Progress

Setting Rules and Ensuring Implementation

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, is a landmark legislation by the Government of India. It aims to bring transparency and good governance to the real estate sector, a key part of the Indian economy (Merchant S. et al., 2018). The Act is designed to increase transparency, enhance accountability among promoters and developers, and establish efficient grievance redress forums (Patil S. et al., 2017).

Maharashtra was the first state to establish a regulatory authority for the housing sector. The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly passed the Housing (Regulation and Development) Bill, 2012, and adopted the RERA regulation in 2017, appointing the Authority Chairperson and Members in May 2017. Initiatives like the conciliation forum, digital mapping, virtual hearings, and helpline services by MahaRERA have significantly increased transparency in the state’s real estate sector. Gujarat followed suit, notifying the Gujarat Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules in 2017, which led to the formation of Gujarat RERA (GUJRERA). Key initiatives include regional investment mapping and project progress monitoring. Uttar Pradesh notified its RERA Rules in 2016 and launched its RERA website on July 26, 2017. UPRERA established a Permanent Authority in 2018 to ensure efficient complaint resolution through authorised officers using a web-based management system. UPRERA has also introduced project grading to help homebuyers make informed decisions.

However, a comparative study depicted in Table 2 for the Central Act and the Acts in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh, reveals significant deviations from the intended guidelines of the Central Act (Tiwari, Chauhan 2020). Many states have diluted the rules to favour builders, undermining the spirit of the Act (Rohilla, 2019). Specifically, in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh, discrepancies include the definitions of ongoing projects, penalty clauses for non-compliance, payment schedules, and liability periods for structural defects. There is also a lack of structured scheduling for construction stages and fund releases, along with inadequate quarterly updates on audits and construction (Khot, Shaikh 2019). The clarity of these rules and the extent of state powers to make such dilutions have been examined. The provisions of various states regulating the Central Act were studied and compared, with a particular focus on Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh, as summarised in Table 2 (Tiwari K. et al., 2020).

Table 2: Comparing Provisions of Real Estate Regulatory Act in Various States of India

The definitions of carpet area, common area, and ongoing projects are consistent with the Central Act in Maharashtra and Rajasthan, but are missing in Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat. Similarly, penalties for non-compliance with the Act have been diluted by encompassing compounding fees to avoid imprisonment in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh. Other points of disconnect include the payment schedule and liability period for structural defects.

Online Portal of RERA

The website serves as a platform for homebuyers to access vital information about real estate projects, including project status and approvals, thereby empowering them to make informed decisions. It also plays a significant role in ensuring that developers regularly update information on the financial and structural progress of their projects, which is essential for maintaining accountability and discipline in the sector.

Additionally, the portal facilitates the filing of complaints and grievances, allowing homebuyers to seek redressal for issues related to project delays or non-compliance with regulations. Still these portals are not without their challenges, as many users face difficulties like:

-Efficacy and Usability: While the RERA website is a step towards transparency, its efficacy can be improved by enhancing user interface and accessibility, ensuring that information is easily understandable and accessible to all stakeholders.

-State-Level Variations: The implementation and effectiveness of the RERA website can vary across different states, necessitating a standardised approach to ensure uniformity in information dissemination.

Table 3: Web Portal Analysis of RERA

The RERA web portals, aimed at increasing transparency and accountability in the real estate sector, face challenges across various states in terms of usability and information dissemination. A key issue across Maharashtra, Gujarat, Karnataka, and Madhya Pradesh, is the lack of highlighting important judgments from their respective SRERA (State RERA) authorities. Tamil Nadu’s portal lacks comprehensive information on complaints, penalties, and project orders, while Uttar Pradesh shows poor maintenance of the RERA Annual Reports, with only two updates in five years. Several states, including Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, display inconsistent updates regarding lapsed projects and penalties. Notably, Maharashtra and Gujarat have more frequent annual report updates (three to five in the last five years), but Karnataka and Tamil Nadu show little to no reporting during this period. Overall, the analysis indicates that while the RERA portals represent a positive step towards transparency, their implementation and upkeep require substantial improvement across most states to ensure consistent and reliable access to critical information for all stakeholders.

Redressal through RERA

The effectiveness of RERA (Real Estate Regulatory Authority) in addressing grievances and ensuring project completion varies significantly across different states. While the Act aims to enhance transparency and protect homebuyers, its implementation has resulted in diverse outcomes.

Table 4: Grievance Redressal Analysis

In states like Maharashtra, Gujarat, Karnataka, and Uttar Pradesh, a majority of projects remain incomplete, with Uttar Pradesh having the highest rate of unfinished projects at 99 per cent (Table 4). In contrast, Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu show a more successful track record, with 94 per cent and 88 per cent of projects completed, respectively. Additionally, the time taken to resolve complaints also differs, with Uttar Pradesh demonstrating the most efficient process (200-300 days), while Karnataka takes the longest (556-716 days). These variations underscore the challenges and inconsistencies in RERA’s implementation across states, impacting consumer trust and project timelines.

Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulation Act (UPRERA) vs. Central RERA: Key Differences

More than eight years have passed since the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) was enacted, with the goal of improving consumer protection and the real estate sector across India. Despite notable successes, disparities in implementation within different states persist.

Table 5: Central RERA vs UP RERA Comparison

Registration statistics and grievance redressal records highlight considerable variations in the performance of states concerning RERA compliance. Many states have faltered in sustaining momentum, leading to substantial deviations from the parent Act. This paper delves into the performance of Uttar Pradesh specifically, examining the deviations between the Central Act and the delegated legislation enacted by the state, as showcased in Table 5.

Ongoing Projects: The Centre and Uttar Pradesh RERA (UP RERA), a state regulatory body, have differing interpretations of what constitutes an ‘ongoing project’. Under the central RERA, the term applies to projects that have not yet received a completion certificate. The UP RERA, however, defines an ‘ongoing project’ as an in-progress development where a completion certificate has not been issued; specifically excluding certain types of projects not covered under RERA’s authority those are:

-Cases where the Local Authority has taken control of services for upkeep;

-Where the care of shared spaces and amenities has been handed over to the Residents’ Welfare Association;

-Where 60 per cent of the apartments, homes, and plots have had their sale or lease agreements finalised and all development work is finished; and

-When all development work has been completed and an application for a completion certificate has been submitted to the appropriate authority.

Additionally, discrepancies in the interpretation of terminologies and regulations may also exist between the Central Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) and the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority, for instance.

Carpet Area

UP RERA lacks a formal definition for carpet area but mandates builders and promoters to disclose apartment sizes based on carpet area, even when apartments are sold according to other measures like built-up or super built-up area. Importantly, this disclosure requirement does not invalidate existing agreements between promoters and allottees. For example, despite carpet area disclosure requirements, numerous developers in Uttar Pradesh, such as those operating in Noida and Ghaziabad, initially marketed properties based on super built-up areas, leading to consumer confusion. UP RERA subsequently issued directives reinforcing the obligation to disclose carpet area explicitly to curb such misleading practices (Haidar, 2024).

Escrow Account (followed)

UP RERA does not specifically address escrow accounts in its guidelines, focusing instead primarily on defining land and construction costs. This omission has historically resulted in inadequate regulation of funds management by promoters. A significant example includes the Unnati Fortune “Aranya” project in Noida, deregistered due to financial irregularities and diversion of homebuyer funds (Bhowmick, 2019; Ramnani, 2018). Responding to such gaps, UP RERA introduced stricter banking guidelines in recent times, mandating separate project-specific accounts to enhance financial transparency and prevent misuse of funds (Haidar, 2023).

Functions and Duties of a Promoter

The Central RERA Act requires promoters to regularly update booked apartments, plots, and garages, maintain current project status, and publicly disclose all approvals and pending approvals post - commencement certificate issuance. It also necessitates advertising transparency, including registration numbers and authority website addresses. In contrast, UP RERA lacks explicit requirements for quarterly updates or stage-wise scheduling disclosures. In practice, this has resulted in instances where projects in regions such as Greater Noida faced penalties for failing to provide timely and accurate quarterly progress updates, highlighting deficiencies in promoter transparency and accountability.

Quarterly Updates

In November 2023, UP RERA penalized 1,088 projects for not updating their Quarterly Progress Reports (QPR) on the portal(Moneycontrol News, 2023). Many had given no updated construction status or revised timelines (732 projects provided no targets; 356 gave partial updates). UP RERA fined each defaulting project ₹1–2 lakh, noting that not updating progress “is contrary to the RERA Act” and undermines buyers’ right to current project status.

Misleading Ads

In January 2025, UP RERA slapped a ₹2.66 crore fine on 91 developers for violating advertising norms (Hindustan Times, 2025). These builders had published ads with misleading information or without mandatory details like the UP RERA registration number, QR code, or project bank account, which is against the Act. UP RERA warned that any ad missing such details is illegal, and reiterated that all promotional material must display the project’s RERA registration prominently (Hindustan Times, 2025). This enforcement highlights promoters’ duty to truthfully advertise only registered projects with all required disclosures.

Advance Payments

While the Central Act caps advance payments or application fees at 10 per cent of the property’s cost, UP RERA does not explicitly reiterate this cap. This absence led to situations where developers demanded higher upfront payments. In response to multiple complaints about excessive booking amounts, UP RERA clarified through advisories that collecting over 10 per cent of the property’s cost without an executed sale agreement was illegal, reiterating compliance requirements under the Central Act (Economic Times, 2024).

Adherence to Sanctioned Plans and Project Specifications

Although UP RERA remains silent on modifications to sanctioned plans, the UP Apartment Act mandates obtaining explicit consent from purchasers, project architects, or engineers and securing approval from prescribed authorities before altering project specifics. Non-compliance is exemplified by the high-profile Supertech Emerald Court case in Noida, where unauthorised construction led to a Supreme Court directive for demolition (SUPERTECH LTD. v. EMERALD COURT OWNER RESIDENT WELFARE ASSOCIATION | Supreme Court Of India | Judgment | Law | CaseMine, 2021), emphasising the importance of adhering strictly to statutory requirements.

Functions of Authority

Central RERA guidelines require authorities to maintain detailed public databases of promoter details, project specifics, and reasons for registration revocations. UP RERA has historically lacked transparency in publishing detailed reasons for such revocations. Between 2020 and 2023, UP RERA deregistered multiple projects without adequately publicising the rationale behind each revocation, highlighting a transparency gap affecting consumer interests.

Real Estate Appellate Tribunal

Under Central RERA, promoters appealing against Authority decisions must deposit at least 30 per cent of the penalty amount, including compensation and interest, before the tribunal considers the appeal. UP RERA does not explicitly enforce this requirement. However, case law from the Allahabad High Court has clarified this position (Arora, 2022), dismissing appeals lacking mandatory deposits and underscoring that compliance with deposit requirements is non-negotiable.

Penalties for Non-Registration

The Real Estate Regulation Act authorises stringent penalties for non-compliance, including failure to register projects. UP RERA’s application has typically favoured monetary penalties capped at 10 per cent of the project’s estimated cost rather than immediate imprisonment. Notably, the Ansal API group faced significant penalty for selling units without registration in Lucknow (TNN, 2025), reflecting UP RERA’s emphasis on financial penalties over criminal prosecution unless warranted by repeated non-compliance.

These variations in interpretation and enforcement of RERA provisions within Uttar Pradesh significantly influence consumer protection efficacy and regulatory effectiveness in the real estate sector.

Conclusion

The research highlights the importance of the Real Estate Regulatory Act (RERA) in shaping India’s real estate market by promoting transparency, accountability, and consumer protection. As a pivotal sector contributing to the country’s economic growth, real estate is poised to expand significantly over the next decade. However, the industry’s sensitivity to policy changes and its history of consumer protection issues make regulatory frameworks like RERA essential for fostering a healthy market environment. The Act’s introduction in 2016 was a crucial step towards curbing malpractices, ensuring professionalism, and empowering homebuyers. The comparative analysis of global best practices in real estate regulation, such as Dubai’s Dubai Land Department, the U.S.’s registered agents, and China’s accountability framework, underscores the value of robust governance. These international models reveal the importance of enforcing stringent regulations to protect consumer interests and promote market growth. Similarly, RERA, despite its sound framework, faces challenges in consistent implementation across Indian states, revealing gaps that need to be addressed to maximise its effectiveness.

A key finding is the significant variation in RERA implementation across Indian states. Maharashtra, Gujarat, and Uttar Pradesh have made considerable progress in project registration and grievance redressal, with Maharashtra excelling in registrations and Uttar Pradesh demonstrating efficiency in complaint resolution. However, other states, such as Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, lag in transparency and updates on their RERA portals, affecting consumers’ ability to make informed decisions. Furthermore, the analysis of state deviations from the Central Act, particularly in states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat, highlights serious discrepancies in key areas such as project definitions, escrow accounts, and penalty structures. These deviations often favour developers at the expense of consumer protection, diluting the Act’s core objectives.

In Uttar Pradesh, the research identifies critical gaps in UP RERA compared to the central RERA, such as a lack of clear definitions for ongoing projects and carpet areas, the absence of escrow account regulations, and weak provisions for promoter duties and project updates. Additionally, UP RERA’s lack of clear guidelines on advance payments, weak provisions for sanctioned plan modifications (addressed only after prominent legal cases like Supertech Emerald Court), and diluted penalty structures further weaken its effectiveness. These omissions create inconsistencies in consumer protection and weaken regulatory oversight. Additionally, UP RERA’s failure to limit advance payments, provide structured project updates, or enforce stringent penalties for non-compliance further undermines its effectiveness. The comparative study of other states like Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan reveals similar dilution of central RERA provisions, particularly concerning penalties, project updates, and registration requirements. These discrepancies lead to uneven enforcement and create a regulatory environment where builders may exploit weaker regulations to the detriment of homebuyers.

In conclusion, while RERA has significantly reshaped India’s real estate landscape, its full potential remains hindered by inconsistent state-level execution. To maximise its impact, states—particularly Uttar Pradesh—must align more closely with the central RERA provisions, emphasising consumer protection over developer convenience. Adopting lessons from international best practices, coupled with stricter compliance measures and robust oversight, is imperative. Such an approach will foster greater market transparency, strengthen consumer trust, and contribute to a fairer and healthier real estate environment across India.

References

Arora, S. (2022, April 16). Compliance of Pre-Deposit Under Section 43(5) of the RERA Act Mandatory to be Complied Before Entertainment of Appeal in a Tribunal: Allahabad HC. Retrieved from https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/allahabad-high-court-compliance-pre-deposit-section-435-rera-act-mandatory-complied-entertainment-appeal-tribunal-196781.

Boston Consulting Group. (2021). Five Years On: An Assessment of RERA – The Road Ahead for a Stronger On-Ground Regime, Ravi Srivastava, Neetu Vasanta, and Amita Parekh.

Bhowmick, S. (2019, May 25). Noida project first to be deregistered by UP-Rera | Noida News - Times of India. Retrieved from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/noida/a-first-rera-cancels-projects-registration/articleshow/69489962.cms.

Chauhan, K., & Tiwari, P. (2018). Challenges of RERA: An analysis of New Reforms. https://doi.org/10.3759/jocetm.v7i3.34.

Economic Times. (2024, January 24). Planning to buy a property? Rera has issued a warning. Read this before investing. Retrieved from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/property-/-cstruction/planning-to-buy-a-property-rera-has-issued-a-warning-read-this-before-investing/articleshow/106810746.cms?from=mdr.

Haidar, F. (2023, December 9). UP RERA asks builders to maintain three bank accounts for a project. Retrieved from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/property-/-cstruction/up-rera-asks-builders-to-maintain-three-bank-accounts-for-a-project/articleshow/105859761.cms?from=mdr.

Haidar, F. (2024, January 3). UP RERA directs developers to sell apartments as per carpet area. Retrieved from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/property-/-cstruction/up-rera-directs-developers-to-sell-apartments-as-per-carpet-area/articleshow/106520936.cms?from=mdr.

Hindustan Times. (2025, January 25). UP-Rera slaps ₹2.66 crore fine on 91 developers for violating project advertising norms. Retrieved from https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/noida-news/uprera-slaps-2-66-crore-fine-on-91-developers-for-violating-project-advertising-norms-101737744373889.html.

IIHS. (2023). Efficacy of RERA Web Portals (pp. 1–4). Retrieved from https://iihs.co.in/knowledge-gateway/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Efficacy-of-RERA-web-portals_Policy-Brief-1.pdf.

Jha, D., Manish, D., & Singla, S. (2023). The State of Real Estate Regulation in India 2023. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.24943/TSRERI11.2023.

Khot, S., & Shaikh, A. (2019). Impact of Real Estate Regulation and Development Act (RERA). Cikitusi Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 6(6), 4–7.

Merchant, S., Pednekar, R., & Arolkar, D. (2018). Analysis of dilutions of the Real Estate (Regulations and Development) Act 2016 by state governments: A case study. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT), 6(2), 742–749.

Moneycontrol News. (2023, August 11). UP real estate regulator penalises over 1,000 projects for not submitting QPRs properly. Retrieved from https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/real-estate/up-real-estate-regulator-penalises-over-1000-projects-for-not-submitting-qprs-properly-11700631.html.

Patil, S. P., & Waghmare, A. (2017). Impact of Real Estate Regulation and Development Act (RERA) on India’s Real Estate Sector. https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRST184119.

Ramnani, V. (2018, November 22). UP RERA issues show cause notices to 12 builders for diverting Rs 3,000-crore funds. Retrieved from https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/real-estate/up-rera-issues-show-cause-notices-to-12-builders-for-diverting-rs-3000-crore-funds-3207771.html.

RERA, Pub. L. No. S.O. 1544(E) (2016). Retrieved from https://www.icsi.edu/media/portals/86/bare%20acts/THE%20REAL%20ESTATE%20(REGULATION%20AND%20DEVELOPMENT)%20ACT,%202016.pdf.

Rohilla, S. (2019). Plight of buyers and consumers and respite under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development Act 2016). National Journal of Real Estate Law, 1(1).

Sharma, S. (2018). Impact of RERA on Indian economy: A critical analysis. International Journal of Law Management & Humanities, 1(3). ISSN: 2581–5369.

Supertech Ltd. v. Emerald Court Owner Resident Welefare Association. (2021, August 31). Supreme Court of India Judgment. Retrieved from https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/62ba6741b50db90d4b55ee7d.

TNN. (2025, January 9). UP-RERA slaps penalty on Ansals for violating norms. Retrieved from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/up-rera-slaps-penalty-on-ansals-for-violating-norms/articleshow/117064597.cms.

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

Tiwari, R. K., & Chauhan, K. A. (2020). Strategies and analysis of RERA across the ‘State Cluster’ of India. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29(7s), 4217-4224.

UPRERA. (2019). Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UP RERA) Report. Retrieved from https://up-rera.in/pdf/RERA%20REPORT6919.pdf.

UPRERA. (2024). UP RERA: Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority. Retrieved from https://up-rera.in/Frm_view_NCLT_Projectlist.aspx.