The Forum For People’s Collective Efforts (FPCE) has raised serious concerns over the implementation of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), claiming that weaknesses in enforcement by state Real Estate Regulatory Authorities have left millions of homebuyers waiting for delayed projects.
As RERA completes 10 years, FPCE has released a 192-page report titled “RERA Extension Abuse: How Regulatory Failure Is Betraying India’s Homebuyers”, examining the manner in which project completion extensions have been granted by regulatory authorities across states.
According to FPCE, the problem is not the RERA legislation itself but the manner in which it is being implemented.
FPCE: RERA Has Not Failed, Enforcement Has
FPCE President Abhay Upadhyay said the legislation itself has provided a strong statutory framework for protecting homebuyers, but its effectiveness has been weakened by inadequate enforcement.
He said:
“RERA has not failed as a statute. Its enforcement has.”
According to FPCE, when regulatory authorities do not strictly enforce statutory requirements, the objectives of the legislation can be undermined even though the law itself remains intact.
The organisation’s report describes its findings as an attempt at “course correction”, with the objective of restoring the discipline, accountability and intent behind RERA.
27.6 Lakh Homebuyer Families Estimated to Be Affected
One of the most significant claims in the FPCE report is its estimate that approximately 27.6 lakh homebuyer families have money trapped in delayed or undelivered real estate projects across the country.
FPCE said its estimate is based on Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs RERA Tracker data as of March 2, 2026.
Using a conservative estimated exposure of ₹45 lakh per homebuyer family, FPCE calculated that the total amount locked in undelivered projects could be approximately:
₹12.44 Lakh Crore
The organisation stressed that this represents more than an industry or regulatory statistic.
For individual families, the money represents life savings, shelter and financial security.
FPCE Report Examines Extension of Project Completion Dates
The 192-page report focuses particularly on what FPCE describes as abuse of project completion extensions.
According to the organisation, extensions granted to developers are sometimes being used to regularise delays instead of addressing the underlying reasons for the delay and ensuring accountability.
FPCE said its findings are based on evidence obtained from:
- Official records
- Project extension orders
- Regulatory filings
- Decisions issued by RERA authorities
- Documents relating to projects across multiple states
The organisation therefore says the report is based on documented regulatory action rather than merely anecdotal complaints from individual homebuyers.
Extensions Allegedly Being Granted Without Proper Scrutiny
FPCE has raised concerns that statutory conditions are not always being adequately examined before extensions of project completion dates are granted.
According to the homebuyers’ body, regulatory authorities should examine whether the statutory requirements and conditions for granting an extension have actually been satisfied.
Instead, FPCE alleges that delays are increasingly being regularised through extensions.
The organisation argues that this can undermine one of the central purposes of RERA—ensuring that promoters remain accountable for their commitments to homebuyers.
“Delay Is Being Institutionalised”
FPCE President Abhay Upadhyay criticised what the organisation sees as a shift from enforcement to administrative accommodation.
According to FPCE, when repeated extensions are granted without sufficiently examining the circumstances behind the delay, the regulatory system can inadvertently allow developers to postpone completion.
Upadhyay described the concern in strong terms, saying that the regulatory process can become a mechanism through which “delay is institutionalised.”
The concern is particularly relevant to homebuyers who may have already waited several years beyond the originally promised possession date.
RERA Was Designed to Protect Homebuyers
The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 was enacted to regulate the relationship between promoters and homebuyers and bring greater transparency and accountability to the real estate sector.
The legislation created a framework requiring promoters to make important project information available and comply with statutory obligations.
RERA was also intended to provide homebuyers with regulatory and adjudicatory mechanisms for addressing issues such as:
- Delayed possession
- Project-related misrepresentations
- Failure to comply with contractual obligations
- Deficiencies in project development
- Refund and interest claims
- Non-registration of projects
- Violations of promoter obligations
The FPCE report argues that the effectiveness of these statutory protections ultimately depends upon consistent implementation and enforcement by state authorities.
70% Separate Account Requirement
One of the key safeguards under RERA is the requirement concerning funds collected from homebuyers.
Under Section 4(2)(l)(D), promoters are required to deposit 70% of the amounts realised from allottees from time to time into a separate account in a scheduled bank.
The money is intended to be used for land cost and construction cost of the relevant project.
The objective is to prevent diversion of homebuyers’ funds and ensure that money collected for a project is substantially utilised for completing that project.
This mechanism is particularly important in the context of delayed and stalled projects because misuse or diversion of project funds can contribute to financial stress and incomplete construction.
Promoters Also Have Extensive Disclosure Obligations
RERA requires promoters to provide significant information concerning their projects.
This includes details relating to:
- Project approvals
- Sanctioned plans
- Development timelines
- Project specifications
- Promoter details
- Status of construction
- Financial and legal information required under the Act and applicable rules
The disclosure framework is intended to allow homebuyers to make informed decisions and enable regulatory authorities to monitor project progress.
Supreme Court Has Also Examined Delayed Projects
FPCE also referred to observations made by the Supreme Court of India in various matters involving delayed housing projects.
The organisation said that the Supreme Court has made strong observations concerning the functioning of regulatory mechanisms and the need to protect homebuyers affected by prolonged delays.
The broader issue is that a statutory right on paper may not provide effective protection if regulatory orders are delayed, completion dates are repeatedly extended or enforcement mechanisms are not effectively utilised.
FPCE Is a Member of the Central Advisory Council
FPCE also has a formal role in the RERA framework.
The organisation is a member of the Central Advisory Council (CAC) established under Section 41 of the RERA Act.
The Central Advisory Council is intended to advise the Central Government on matters concerning implementation of the Act, major policy questions and protection of the interests of allottees, promoters and real estate agents.
FPCE’s position therefore comes from an organisation that participates in the broader institutional framework surrounding RERA.
Why the Report Matters for Homebuyers
The FPCE report puts the issue of RERA enforcement and project extensions at the centre of the debate as the legislation completes a decade.
For a homebuyer, a project extension is not merely an administrative decision.
An extension can mean:
Additional rent: A buyer may continue paying rent while waiting for the purchased home.
Loan burden: Homebuyers may have to continue servicing EMIs without receiving possession.
Escalating costs: Construction delays can affect household finances and the cost of alternative accommodation.
Uncertainty: Repeated changes to completion dates make financial and family planning difficult.
Reduced confidence: Frequent extensions can undermine confidence in the regulatory framework.
FPCE’s report argues that these consequences should be considered when regulatory authorities examine applications for extension.
Need for Stronger RERA Enforcement
The central message from FPCE is that RERA’s effectiveness depends upon enforcement.
The legislation was designed to establish discipline in the real estate sector, but regulatory authorities need to ensure that statutory conditions are properly examined and that promoters remain accountable for project completion.
From the homebuyer’s perspective, the issue is ultimately about whether a regulatory framework can deliver its promised protection when a project is delayed.
The FPCE report therefore calls for greater scrutiny of project extension applications, regulatory compliance and enforcement mechanisms.
RERA at 10: A Need for Course Correction?
Ten years after the enactment of RERA, the debate has moved beyond the question of whether India needed a real estate regulator.
The larger question is now whether the existing regulatory system is strong enough and sufficiently consistent in implementation to deliver the protection promised by the legislation.
FPCE’s report argues that the answer requires significant course correction.
Its estimate of 27.6 lakh affected homebuyer families and ₹12.44 lakh crore potentially locked in undelivered projects underlines the scale of the issue identified by the organisation.
Whether the reported figures and conclusions lead to changes in how state RERA authorities deal with extension applications remains to be seen. However, the report has renewed the debate over accountability, project completion and enforcement of RERA.
Key Takeaway
The RERA Act was enacted to bring transparency, accountability and discipline to India’s real estate sector, but its effectiveness ultimately depends on how consistently its provisions are enforced.
FPCE’s 192-page report argues that repeated project extensions without adequate scrutiny can convert a regulatory remedy into a mechanism for prolonging delays.
With an estimated 27.6 lakh homebuyer families reportedly affected and approximately ₹12.44 lakh crore potentially locked in delayed projects, the organisation has called for stronger enforcement and a reassessment of how project completion extensions are granted.
For millions of homebuyers, the debate is not simply about regulatory policy. It concerns their homes, life savings, loan obligations and financial security.
