Fragmented rules complicate building safety oversight across Indian cities | India News

Building authorisations are a maze of rules, laws, and notifications across Indian cities, but have little or no relation to the status of the colonies which they are supposed to regulate.

“Building approvals in India operate within a framework set primarily by state governments. While the Constitution recognises urban planning, regulation of land use and construction of buildings, and fire services as functions that may be assigned to municipalities, the extent of those powers depends on how each state has structured its urban governance framework,” noted Vishal Gupta, executive director, Deloitte India.

According to him, for most urban projects, the executing authority is the municipal corporation or other urban local bodies that serve as the primary approval authority. They typically scrutinise building plans, issue construction permissions, and grant completion or occupancy certificates.

Buildings in India are supposed to follow the National Building Code (NBC) designed by the Bureau of Indian Standards. The Code was first published in 1970 at the instance of the erstwhile Planning Commission and then revised several times. The last amendment was made in 2015. However, most state public workds departments (PWDs) have failed to adopt it. Municipal bodies like the Municipal Corporation of India do not even refer to it.

On paper, the NBC is supposed to apply to all kinds of buildings, even in designated areas like Lal Dora enclaves, which are designated urban villages in Delhi.

However, no state government has been questioned on the delay or otherwise in the adoption of the NBC. Instead, in most states, the broader rules are laid down by a welter of rules like the municipal laws, town and country planning legislation, development plans, and development control regulations. There is also the Model Building Bye-Laws written by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. These serve as model frameworks, but again, become enforceable only when adopted through state laws, municipal bye-laws, or planning regulations.

“These determine what can be built, where it can be built and under what conditions. Parameters such as land use, floor area ratio (FAR), building height, setbacks, density, parking and safety requirements are generally governed through these regulations”, said Gupta.

The problem is particularly dire in Delhi, home to Delhi University’s north and south campuses, which have a combined student population of over 250,000, but housing facilities for only 9,000, according to a media report. Lal Dora areas around these campuses have gone on a building spree over the decades and offer a cheap but unsafe living arrangement for the tens of thousands of students who don’t get into a hostel.

As India rapidly urbanises, how dwellings are made in cities have become a matter of intense concern, as the recent incidents show. But building regulations have hardly moved over the years.

Ironically, the Delhi Development Authority has a long list of unauthorised colonies. The surprise is in the name of the list. It says “unauthorised colonies inhabited by affluent sections of society”.

That affluent people can be allowed to violate building bye-laws to build colonies and then wait for regularisation shows up the state of municipal regulations most strikingly in Delhi. Nonetheless, there is no regulatory action to confirm if buildings in such colonies are structurally safer than the ones which collapsed in Malviya Nagar and Satya Niketan in Delhi. The latter, however, are authorised and do not form part of the so-called ‘affluent’ but unauthorised colonies. Incidentally, except one, all of these affluent unauthorised colonies are also in Delhi’s South and Central zones cheek by jowl with some of the authorised colonies where the buildings collapsed.

To make matters worse, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi has moved to make rules easier to get construction permits. There are now provisions to expedite plan sanctions rapid along with provisions for joint inspections.

These include measures like Online Common Application Form (CAF) for Building permit, including online checklists, a single interface for applicants for construction permits, online registration of Architect/Engineer/Supervisor/Structural Engineers, and assurance of no physical Interface of the applicant with external agencies.

These are followed by online provision to track the status of applications, and online issuance of digitally signed sanction letters. The problem, as a media report pointed out, is that commercial institutions often have their plans cleared despite the online status. The report said only 31 or 1.2 per cent, of such buildings have a No Objection Certificate from the Delhi Fire Service. Of the 726 buildings used for paying guest accommodation, a mere eight buildings have a structural stability certificate.

As Gupta points out, these clearances not only take time but also differ across each city. So an urban planner having complied with a Delhi set of rules could come a cropper in Mumbai or Bengaluru. Even within a metropolitan region, different areas may fall under different regulatory authorities. A municipal corporation may regulate one area, while a development authority, industrial township authority or cantonment board regulates another. Consequently, the rules and approval pathways applicable to a project can change significantly within the same urban region. Clearly, a lot needs to change for buildings to stop collapsing on top of the innocents looking for a roof above their head to keep them safe in the city.