Advertisement
Private equity has played a significant role in shaping Indi...
In today’s real estate landscape, fitness is often treated...
In this episode of Prop Personalities, we sit down with Hars...
Luxury real estate is one of the most talked-about segments ...
Welcome to Prop Personalities by Prop News Time - a podcast ...
The Odisha Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (OREAT) has allowed Kantabada Gram Panchayat to challenge a housing project approved by the Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA), widening the interpretation of who can file complaints under RERA. The tribunal held that a panchayat qualifies as an ‘aggrieved person’, overturning an earlier rejection by the state regulator. The dispute relates to a 26-unit residential project in a rural area, where the panchayat has contested BDA’s authority to grant approvals. The case highlights jurisdictional conflicts between local self-government bodies and urban development authorities, with implications for planning control, land use governance and project approvals in peri-urban regions.
The Odisha Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (OREAT) has allowed Kantabada Gram Panchayat to pursue its challenge against a housing project approved by the Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA), ruling that a panchayat qualifies as an ‘aggrieved person’ under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA). Advertisement
The decision was delivered earlier this week, overturning a previous order by the Odisha Real Estate Regulatory Authority (ORERA), which had dismissed the complaint on the grounds that the panchayat did not fall within the definition of an eligible complainant.
The dispute centres on a proposed three-storey residential development comprising 26 units in Kantabada. The gram panchayat has argued that the project falls within a rural jurisdiction where approval authority lies with local bodies, and not with the BDA.
According to the panchayat, the BDA granted building plan approval despite the area continuing to be classified as rural under existing administrative frameworks. The panchayat has cited a 2018 notification issued by the Panchayati Raj department, which assigns building approval powers in such areas to gram panchayats.
OREAT observed that the interpretation of the term ‘aggrieved person’ under RERA cannot be restricted only to allottees, promoters or real estate agents. The tribunal noted that any competent authority affected by a project approval could qualify to file a complaint, provided the matter relates to a promoter or project registered under the Act.
The tribunal also indicated that the earlier regulatory order had not adequately examined key issues, including whether the BDA had jurisdiction to grant approvals in the concerned area. It directed that the matter be reconsidered, with a detailed review of the authority’s role and applicable legal provisions.
The case reflects increasing instances of jurisdictional overlap between urban development authorities and local self-government institutions, particularly in peri-urban and transitional regions where administrative boundaries and planning powers may not be clearly aligned.
The ruling is expected to have wider implications for real estate governance, as it expands the scope of entities that can challenge project approvals under RERA. It may also lead to greater scrutiny of approvals granted in areas where jurisdiction between planning authorities and panchayats remains contested.
With the matter now set for reconsideration, the outcome could influence how development permissions are processed in similar cases, particularly in regions undergoing urban expansion where rural and urban governance frameworks intersect.
5th Jun, 2025
25th May, 2023
11th May, 2023
27th Apr, 2023
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
