The Chief Justice of the High Court of Calcutta has nominated a senior judge to oversee RERA implementation in West Bengal.

The Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court has nominated a senior judge to facilitate the formation of adjudicatory bodies under the central act, indicating that the West Bengal government is moving to implement the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016.

The state government’s counsel informed the Supreme Court of this development while urging the court not to hear a recent application filed by the Forum for People’s Collective Efforts (FPCE), a pan-India homebuyers’ body aiming to push RERA implementation in the state.

According to FPCE, this is a step in the right direction and is a huge relief for all West Bengal homebuyers.

“We are now optimistic that, with the involvement of the Presiding Judge of the Calcutta High Court, assignments will be made shortly to represent the supervisory role and the Appellate Authority under RERA, that will also pave the way for redress of grievances of homebuyers’ complaints…,” Abhay Upadhyay, President, FPCE, told ET. “FPCE will continue to pursue RERA implementation in West Bengal and, if absolutely required, will resistance training the Supreme Court’s freedom to pursue other remedies.”

Upadhyay also serves on the Union government’s RERA central advisory council.

The homebuyers’ organisation recently petitioned the Supreme Court, requesting that the state government implement the RERA 2016 in the state within three months of receiving such a directive from the high court.

Following a petition filed by FPCE, the Supreme Court ruled in May that the West Bengal Housing Industry Regulation Act was unconstitutional (WBHIRA). It ruled that the state Act is a parallel regime that cannot be enforced in light of RERA 2016, which was enacted by Parliament.

“Last year, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision that paved the way for the implementation of RERA in the state of West Bengal.” According to the current order, the state is expected to take all necessary steps to ensure that the central enactment is fully implemented,” said Advocate Devashish Bharuka, who is representing FPCE in court.

The Supreme Court ruled in May that the state of West Bengal was required to fully implement RERA provisions.

The Real Estate Authority and Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, in particular, were to be formed and members appointed for the benefit of homebuyers.

However, the state has failed to fully implement RERA’s provisions, leaving the real estate sector in the state effectively unregulated.

The West Bengal government notified the rules governing the state’s real estate regulatory authority under Section 84 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016, in July, a move seen as a step toward implementing central legislation in the state. The state then established the Real Estate Regulatory Authority and the RERA Appellate Tribunal.

It has not, however, established the authority or the tribunal by appointing members and chairpersons. FPCE also requests that the court order the state to file a report following the implementation of the law.

In July and August, FPCE wrote to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) and the West Bengal Ministry of Housing, requesting that RERA be implemented effectively and expeditiously in the state.

According to the FPCE petition, all RERA rules governing the registration of projects and agents were being violated because there was no working authority.

West Bengal’s separate state housing legislation was signed into law by the Governor in October 2017, but the central government’s RERA was signed into law by the President earlier, in March 2016.

On May 1, 2017, the Centre’s RERA was fully notified and implemented across the country – with the exception of Jammu and Kashmir. RERA is now in effect in J&K as well.

Existing state legislations in Maharashtra and Kerala were also repealed in the context of the central RERA. While repealing the state Act, the Kerala government stated that if any provision of a law made by the state legislature is in conflict with any law made by Parliament, the state law is null and void.