Housing: India
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Affordable housing
2017: Budget homes drive growth
Govt Sops Boost Sales Of Flats Below Rs 30 Lakh
After years of selling pricey luxury homes that boasted amenities like signature golf courses and jacuzzis, builders finally seem to be moving toward modest apartments to suit middle-class pockets. A clear indicator of this is the sharp uptick in home loans driven by sales of houses costing below Rs 30 lakh. The cue for builders to change tack came from this year's Budget, which offered tempting tax and interest concessions for the affordab le housing segment.
This year, almost half of all bank credit comprised loans to housing, given the almost non-existent corporate loan demand. According to HDFC chairman Deepak Parekh, the corporation's January loan applications rose 21% over December. February applications were another 24% higher, and March was 44% more than the previous month.
“What is driving this growth is not high-value property but affordable homes, considering that the corporation's average loan size is Rs 25.6 lakh. This is the first time in several quarters that HDFC's average loan size has dropped from Rs 26 lakh, he said.
Property experts said Ahmedabad was the largest contributor of such homes (costing less than Rs 30 lakh), followed by Pune (up to Rs 50 lakh) and areas in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region like Badlapur, Ambernath, Vasai-Virar, Dombivli, Kalyan, Panvel, Ulwe and Taloja.
Housing finance providers are now expecting the affordable home segment to grow at 25% given the subsidy under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY). The scheme, available until December 2017, provides 4% subsidy on home loans of up to Rs 9 lakh for those with an income of up to Rs 12 lakh per year, and 3% subsidy on loans of up to Rs 12 lakh for those earning up to Rs 18 lakhper year.
Pankaj Kapoor, MD of Liases Foras, a real estate research firm, said on a quarteron-quarter basis, maximum sales growth (31%) was reported in the affordable segment (properties priced below Rs 25 lakh), while the ultraluxury segment witnessed a 4% decline in sales. The October to December 2016 period saw a slump following demonetisation, but demand between January and March 2017 was healthy .
Developer Niranjan Hiranandani said sales at his Thane project for flats below 600 sq ft had been good. “There will be a further surge when more projects start hitting the market and people start getting the tax benefits, he said.
Mortgage company Indiabulls Housing told investors that for a borrower seeking Rs 24 lakh, the effective rate he or she will pay works out to only 0.42% after factoring all tax breaks and subsidies.
“Effective home loan rate in the mid-income affordable housing segment is at near-zero levels. With rental yields at 3.2%, home ownership is very affordable and much cheaper than renting a house,“ a company official said.
According to Subhash Chennuri, senior consultant with consulting firm FSG, more finance is being made available for housing units which are as low or even below Rs 12 lakh.
The PMAY scheme comes on the back of the Union budget proposals. Besides, developers who build affordable homes are exempted from paying taxes on their profits for five years starting 2016 instead of three years.These are for 300 sq ft homes in the four metro cities and 600 sq ft in non-metro areas.
2017, decline in non-budget housing demand
Rachel Chitra, Housing demand slows despite good loan deals, June 7, 2017: The Times of India
Top 8 Cities See 16% Dip In Launches From 2016
Top eight cities witnessed residential launches of about 25,800 units in the first quarter of 2017, registering a 16% decline from the corresponding period last year, said Cushman & Wakefield. Other than affordable housing, most segments like mid and high-end saw a sharp decline. This trend is expected to continue over the next two-to-three quarters, as large sets of unsold inventory continue to burden the real estate market.
Most cities including Chennai and Hyderabad saw a decline, while Mumbai and Ahmedabad were the only markets which saw growth.Delayed launches in many cities was not so much due to a lack of inventory , but because developers want better price realisation for their unsold stock. Developers have also started bundling in incentives and add-ons to clear inventory backlog.
This trend of declining in terest in residential apartments -despite lower rates on mortgage loans --has been seen since last March, when the government announced the Real Estate Regulatory Act (RERA), 2016.
Decline in launches has peaked when demonetisation was announced last No vember, said Cushman & Wakefield. In this tepid environment, affordable housing has seen the biggest increases -with share in total launches up 30% from 25% earlier; compared to decline in the share of high-end and luxury segments to 11% from 13% during the same period.
“With mild change in end user sentiments due to news of downsizing in IT ITeS segment, sales velocity is expected to reduce. A gradual improvement in buyer sentiment is expected towards the second half of 2017 as the impact of real estate reforms will begin to play out in the market. Capital values which are already reduced in selected locations within markets such as Delhi NCR, Bengaluru and Mumbai, will continue to remain under pressure in the coming quarter as the markets readjust in the post RERA and GST regime,“ said Anshul Jain, managing director, Cushman & Wakefield.
“We expect investors' and homebuyers' interest to revive in the residential sector post the enforcement of RERA and GST as transparency and accountability improves,“ he added.
With cities like Chennai seeing a 6% decline in sales, developers have launched a higher number of subvention schemes such as paying 5% now, 95% on delivery .
“Some developers are going a step further and offering assurances of compensation refund of difference, if prices decline in the future,“ he added.
2015-19: Housing becomes less affordable
July 12, 2019: The Times of India
From: July 12, 2019: The Times of India
Housing becomes less affordable: RBI study
Mumbai Remains Least Affordable Over 4 Yrs, Bhubaneswar Is Cheapest Among 13 Cities
Mumbai:
Even as the real estate industry complains of a slowdown in sales, a Reserve Bank of India (RBI) survey has said that housing has become less affordable over the last four years. This indicates that developers are holding on to prices. According to the report, Mumbai remains the least affordable city in India, while Bhubaneswar has the cheapest real estate among the 13 cities that were studied by RBI.The study measures affordability by comparing the price to monthly income of average home loan borrowers. According to the report, the house price to income ratio increased from 56.1 in March 2015 to 61.5 in March 2019 for all cities. Another measure used is the loan to income ratio, which has increased from 3 in March 2015 to 3.4 in March 2019.
The average loan to value ratio moved from 67.7% in March 2015 to 69.6% in March 2019. A spike in this ratio reflects lenders taking higher risks as they would have a lower security if real estate prices crash. A report by real estate consultancy Liases Foras placed the unsold housing stock in 30 cities at the end of FY19 at 12.76 lakh — up 8% from 11.9 lakh in FY18.
Home buyers in Mumbai now pay 43.3% of their income as EMI as against 42.6% of their income in March 2015. In Chennai, it has gone up from 36.7% to 38.4%, while in Delhi borrowers who used to pay 35.1% of their salaries now have to set aside 36.9%. Among metros, only Bengaluru has seen the EMI to income ratio unchanged at 35% even as Kolkata and Hyderabad have seen a rise from 34% and 35.1% to 35.8% and 36.8% respectively. The RBI’s quarterly residential asset price monitoring survey was conducted by studying home loans disbursed in Mumbai, Chennai, Delhi, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Pune, Jaipur, Chandigarh, Ahmedabad, Lucknow, Bhopal and Bhubaneswar. Among these, Mumbai, Pune and Ahmedabad recorded a higher median EMI to income ratio .
Interestingly, the RBI’s study is in sharp contrast to the experience of HDFC. The country’s largest housing finance company said in a presentation to investors that affordability, measured as ratio of property prices to annual income, had reduced from 4.4 in 2015 to 3.9 in 2014. This meant that borrowers were able to buy a house with 3.9 years of salary as against 4.4 years in 2015. According to HDFC, this has happened because overall value of property it has financed has come down marginally while incomes have slightly risen.
Bankers say that HDFC’s experience might be different because of the focus on affordable housing. A large part of the growth for the mortgage giant comes from small cities or from financing housing projects at the outskirts of metros. As a result, HDFC’s average loan size is Rs 27 lakh.
Distribution of households
Information courtesy:
Distribution of households by pucca and kutcha house by social groups, 2002 and 2008-09
|
Category of States |
States |
Scheduled Castes - Pucca House - 2002 |
Scheduled Castes - Pucca House - 2008-09 |
Scheduled Castes - Kutcha House - 2002 |
Scheduled Castes - Kutcha House - 2008-09 |
Scheduled Tribes - Pucca House - 2002 |
Scheduled Tribes - Pucca House - 2008-09 |
Scheduled Tribes - Kutcha House - 2002 |
Scheduled Tribes - Kutcha House - 2008-09 |
Other Backward Classes - Pucca House - 2002 |
Other Backward Classes - Pucca House - 2008-9 |
Other Backward Classes - Kutcha House - 2002 |
Other Backward Classes - Kutcha House - 2008-9 |
Others - Pucca House - 2002 |
Others - Pucca House - 2008-9 |
Others - Kutcha House - 2002 |
Others - Kutcha House - 2008-9 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Andhra Pradesh |
42.8 |
56.8 |
29.5 |
15.7 |
47.8 |
71.1 |
22.9 |
12.2 |
51.9 |
72.8 |
17.7 |
9.4 |
66.4 |
86.3 |
9.2 |
4.6 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Assam |
11.1 |
18.1 |
60.9 |
37.9 |
14.6 |
28 |
51.9 |
29.7 |
22.6 |
32.5 |
46.1 |
26.7 |
21.7 |
26.3 |
49.8 |
34 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Bihar |
51.3 |
49.3 |
34.1 |
17.3 |
24.1 |
51.2 |
46.3 |
33.9 |
29.6 |
51.5 |
33.6 |
29 |
47.4 |
73.9 |
27.1 |
14.2 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Chhattisgarh |
9.4 |
22.4 |
4.5 |
3.2 |
23.9 |
32.3 |
0.7 |
1.3 |
21.3 |
48.2 |
0.9 |
1.7 |
48.1 |
79.4 |
1.2 |
0.2 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Delhi |
100 |
100 |
0 |
0 |
88.5 |
89.7 |
1 |
6.4 |
94.3 |
97.8 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
98.1 |
94.9 |
0.4 |
3.4 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Goa |
100 |
89.6 |
0 |
0 |
3.8 |
67 |
6.3 |
19.6 |
0 |
72 |
0.2 |
0.8 |
21.2 |
91.5 |
0.2 |
0.1 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Gujarat |
14.8 |
45.1 |
19.9 |
11.8 |
54.5 |
63.9 |
4.7 |
10.6 |
44.3 |
72.7 |
4 |
5.7 |
83 |
93 |
0.7 |
0.8 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Haryana |
100 |
79.9 |
0 |
12.3 |
75.6 |
88 |
5.4 |
3.5 |
82.4 |
95.2 |
3.7 |
1.6 |
91.6 |
97.9 |
0.7 |
0.5 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Jharkhand |
24 |
20.6 |
21.7 |
21.4 |
18.3 |
28.4 |
14.2 |
32.3 |
30 |
46.9 |
15.1 |
15.5 |
56.4 |
45.3 |
10.2 |
19.9 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Karnataka |
29 |
55.6 |
18.1 |
10.1 |
28.3 |
56.9 |
11.1 |
7.7 |
25.1 |
58 |
7.7 |
4.5 |
45 |
75.5 |
6.1 |
2.3 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Kerala |
47.2 |
73.3 |
10 |
9.5 |
22.9 |
67.9 |
15.7 |
8.1 |
39.3 |
78.9 |
6.5 |
2.8 |
47.4 |
86.2 |
4.1 |
1.5 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Madhya Pradesh |
9.7 |
36.8 |
8.3 |
5.1 |
28.7 |
46.8 |
10.4 |
5.7 |
34.9 |
56.4 |
6.5 |
3.3 |
51.6 |
77 |
2.4 |
1.6 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Maharashtra |
24.8 |
54.4 |
10.6 |
9.2 |
49.8 |
77.1 |
4.8 |
3.2 |
49.9 |
80.6 |
2.8 |
3.1 |
68.1 |
88.8 |
2.4 |
1.2 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Orissa |
17.4 |
25.5 |
45 |
36 |
16.3 |
32 |
57.2 |
44 |
23.8 |
44.6 |
48.7 |
33 |
47 |
58.1 |
35.9 |
28.1 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Punjab |
89.3 |
73.3 |
10.7 |
25.3 |
68.9 |
88.5 |
5 |
3.7 |
74.3 |
91.9 |
6.6 |
2.1 |
81.4 |
97.6 |
0.7 |
0.7 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Rajasthan |
38 |
41.4 |
15.9 |
7.1 |
51.9 |
68.4 |
26.6 |
19.8 |
66.6 |
75.4 |
19 |
13.8 |
77.2 |
91.6 |
10.2 |
4.1 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Tamil Nadu |
26.9 |
71.1 |
46.4 |
16.8 |
30.9 |
61.7 |
30.9 |
21.3 |
39.3 |
75.7 |
18.2 |
9.2 |
69.7 |
96.5 |
4.1 |
1 |
|
Non Special Category States |
Uttar Pradesh |
27.1 |
53.9 |
10.5 |
30.6 |
48.8 |
50.4 |
26.3 |
26.9 |
57 |
68.6 |
19.5 |
14.8 |
75.2 |
81.5 |
10.5 |
7.8 |
|
Non Special Category States |
West Bengal |
20.3 |
28 |
40.8 |
20.5 |
20 |
40.7 |
25.1 |
20.7 |
38.3 |
66.1 |
17.4 |
4.5 |
40.7 |
61.1 |
15.1 |
13.8 |
|
Special Category States |
Arunachal Pradesh |
20.2 |
25.1 |
67.8 |
50.4 |
69 |
55.6 |
31 |
16.8 |
49.6 |
18.9 |
32.1 |
76.8 |
50.6 |
39.3 |
30.6 |
42.2 |
|
Special Category States |
Himachal Pradesh |
33.8 |
54.8 |
0.6 |
2.5 |
37.4 |
79.2 |
1.2 |
0.4 |
40.6 |
61.4 |
0.8 |
1 |
51.6 |
87.4 |
1.4 |
0.6 |
|
Special Category States |
Jammu & Kashmir |
29.2 |
15.7 |
58.7 |
52.6 |
57.3 |
62.8 |
28.7 |
22.7 |
70.8 |
58.3 |
12.1 |
12.7 |
68.1 |
72 |
13.2 |
10.4 |
|
Special Category States |
Manipur |
11.7 |
11 |
47.4 |
37.5 |
0.4 |
14.3 |
19.1 |
8.4 |
11.8 |
15.4 |
20 |
15.7 |
12 |
34.9 |
27.3 |
8.9 |
|
Special Category States |
Meghalaya |
45.7 |
37.6 |
28.5 |
29.3 |
8.9 |
32 |
31.7 |
37.6 |
28.8 |
57.9 |
20.1 |
28.6 |
46.3 |
59.6 |
38.7 |
19.5 |
|
Special Category States |
Mizoram |
65 |
65.5 |
17.2 |
14.1 |
96.4 |
85.2 |
0 |
5.3 |
86.4 |
20 |
13.6 |
68.3 |
78.3 |
54.3 |
13.5 |
7.4 |
|
Special Category States |
Nagaland |
43.2 |
32 |
12.3 |
9.7 |
NA |
33.3 |
100 |
3.8 |
40.3 |
56.3 |
20.3 |
9.4 |
51.8 |
21.9 |
11.8 |
27.7 |
|
Special Category States |
Sikkim |
75 |
54.5 |
4 |
9.8 |
52.3 |
45.6 |
22.2 |
12.6 |
53.1 |
54.4 |
14.7 |
7.6 |
71.4 |
87.5 |
5.8 |
0.3 |
|
Special Category States |
Tripura |
1.9 |
10 |
49.4 |
27.1 |
7 |
13.7 |
25.1 |
7.4 |
11.5 |
23.5 |
24.1 |
4.7 |
15.2 |
31.2 |
27.2 |
6 |
|
Special Category States |
Uttarakhand |
86.6 |
81 |
0 |
13.1 |
76.8 |
85.1 |
9.5 |
5.9 |
77.4 |
93.8 |
10.8 |
2.8 |
75.3 |
96.3 |
2.4 |
0.9 |
|
Union Territories |
Andaman & Nicobar Islands |
60.2 |
85.3 |
28.1 |
0 |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
38.4 |
100 |
9.4 |
58.1 |
52.3 |
24.3 |
8.7 | |
|
Union Territories |
Chandigarh |
88.9 |
100 |
0 |
0 |
78.6 |
99.5 |
1.1 |
0.5 |
81.7 |
95.4 |
0.6 |
0.7 |
84 |
97.8 |
0 |
0 |
|
Union Territories |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
28.5 |
33.3 |
13.1 |
16.5 |
56.7 |
55.7 |
0.4 |
0 |
87.2 |
58.2 |
2.4 |
14.8 |
86.9 |
89.7 |
0.4 |
0 |
|
Union Territories |
Daman & Diu |
62.9 |
59.8 |
0.4 |
21.6 |
55 |
87.4 |
0 |
2.7 |
68.8 |
94.5 |
0.3 |
0.8 |
89.4 |
100 |
0 |
0 |
|
Union Territories |
Lakshadweep |
23.4 |
93.4 |
1 |
4 |
100 |
NA |
0 |
NA |
37.6 |
67.6 |
0 |
32.4 |
9.3 |
98.6 |
1.9 |
1.4 |
|
Union Territories |
Puducherry |
33.1 |
100 |
34.6 |
0 |
18 |
50.3 |
69.2 |
35.2 |
59.1 |
85.3 |
23.5 |
10.2 |
85.1 |
81.2 |
4.3 |
5.2 |
|
All India |
All India |
22.9 |
38.3 |
23.2 |
16.4 |
39.5 |
57.9 |
22.2 |
18.8 |
44.7 |
66.6 |
17 |
12.4 |
61.3 |
77.9 |
10 |
7.7 |
Distribution of households by pucca and kutcha house by major religious communities, 2008-09
|
Category of States |
States |
Hindus - Pucca - House |
Hindus - Kutcha - House |
Muslims - Pucca - House |
Muslims - Kutcha - House |
Christians - Pucca - House |
Christians - Kutcha - House |
Sikhs - Pucca - House |
Sikhs - Kutcha - House |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Andhra Pradesh |
74 |
9.8 |
84.3 |
2.3 |
76.4 |
14.4 |
100 |
22.9 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Assam |
31.9 |
27.5 |
12.7 |
45.2 |
21.2 |
33.6 |
78.7 |
81.8 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Bihar |
57 |
26.4 |
51.1 |
29.3 |
53.8 |
30.9 |
56 |
41.1 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Chhattisgarh |
38.9 |
1.7 |
76.1 |
1.4 |
20.2 |
19.7 |
21 |
0 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Delhi |
94.7 |
3 |
88.8 |
8.5 |
100 |
0 |
100 |
0 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Goa |
83.9 |
2.1 |
87.3 |
0 |
89.9 |
0.3 |
100 |
0 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Gujarat |
71 |
6.2 |
87.5 |
4 |
47.2 |
1.7 |
76.9 |
47.6 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Haryana |
94.3 |
1.5 |
90.9 |
4.2 |
100 |
0 |
96.2 |
1.9 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Jharkhand |
37.5 |
23.4 |
39.5 |
16.1 |
50.2 |
1.8 |
100 |
52.9 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Karnataka |
62 |
5.1 |
70.6 |
1.7 |
81.6 |
0.5 |
69.1 |
37.3 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Kerala |
78 |
4 |
79.4 |
1.4 |
86.2 |
1.9 |
NA |
NA |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Madhya Pradesh |
53 |
3.8 |
74.6 |
6.2 |
80.6 |
0 |
93.1 |
13.6 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Maharashtra |
81.7 |
2.8 |
87.1 |
1.2 |
98.6 |
0.5 |
100 |
7.9 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Orissa |
40.1 |
35.2 |
56.9 |
29.5 |
31.7 |
33 |
100 |
NA |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Punjab |
94.4 |
2.5 |
84.1 |
5.9 |
95.4 |
0.1 |
92.7 |
2 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Rajasthan |
73 |
11.4 |
83 |
12.5 |
78.2 |
0.3 |
63.9 |
29.2 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Tamil Nadu |
72.4 |
12.3 |
82.7 |
1.2 |
82.7 |
6.6 |
NA |
NA |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
Uttar Pradesh |
64.7 |
17.7 |
73.6 |
12.4 |
92.8 |
0 |
85.5 |
7.5 |
|
Non Special Category States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs |
West Bengal |
58.5 |
13.2 |
43.3 |
22.3 |
58.2 |
1.8 |
100 |
37.3 |
|
Special Category States |
Arunachal Pradesh |
37.3 |
45.2 |
44.5 |
8.7 |
18.6 |
61.2 |
NA |
NA |
|
Special Category States |
Himachal Pradesh |
80 |
0.6 |
77.5 |
4.4 |
100 |
0 |
100 |
0.4 |
|
Special Category States |
Jammu & Kashmir |
67.3 |
19.3 |
67.2 |
8.9 |
83.6 |
16.4 |
98.2 |
3.6 |
|
Special Category States |
Manipur |
16.5 |
14.4 |
10.2 |
20.5 |
10.9 |
38 |
3.5 |
NA |
|
Special Category States |
Meghalaya |
45.9 |
31.7 |
28.7 |
46.3 |
39.7 |
28.4 |
100 |
0 |
|
Special Category States |
Mizoram |
43.4 |
38.9 |
85.9 |
0 |
71.2 |
8.3 |
100 |
0 |
|
Special Category States |
Nagaland |
40.3 |
6.8 |
1.1 |
31.3 |
32.1 |
9.6 |
0 |
NA |
|
Special Category States |
Sikkim |
55.5 |
9.4 |
80.8 |
0.9 |
67.6 |
2.6 |
NA |
NA |
|
Special Category States |
Tripura |
19.8 |
12.2 |
16 |
11.7 |
13.5 |
5.9 |
NA |
NA |
|
Special Category States |
Uttarakhand |
93.5 |
2.3 |
90.4 |
5.3 |
95.1 |
0 |
97.9 |
0.7 |
|
Union Territories |
Andaman & Nicobar Islands |
47.8 |
9.4 |
54.9 |
10.3 |
76.2 |
0.9 |
100 |
0 |
|
Union Territories |
Chandigarh |
98.1 |
0.3 |
97.6 |
0 |
100 |
0 |
95 |
0 |
|
Union Territories |
Dadra & Nagar Haveli |
48.9 |
11.7 |
96 |
0 |
79.4 |
0 |
NA |
NA |
|
Union Territories |
Daman & Diu |
92.5 |
2.4 |
100 |
0 |
100 |
0 |
100 |
0 |
|
Union Territories |
Lakshadweep |
97.6 |
2.4 |
93.4 |
3.6 |
0 |
100 |
NA |
NA |
|
Union Territories |
Puducherry |
79.1 |
13.5 |
83.8 |
0 |
75.1 |
24 |
NA |
NA |
|
All India |
All India |
65.4 |
12.7 |
63.8 |
14.7 |
69.3 |
9.6 |
91.3 |
5.7 |
Environmental clearance
Housing projects without green nod illegal: SC
The Times of India, January 16, 2016
Dhananjay Mahapatra
In a jolt to hundreds of builders who have completed housing projects without environment clearance, the Supreme Court on Friday termed such constructions illegal, conceding that it might have committed a mistake by previously staying a National Green Tribunal (NGT) order halting construction of these projects.
The tribunal had struck down the UPA government's `office memorandum' (order) in 2012 and the amendment to it in 2013, which had condoned construction carried out by builders without obtaining prior environ ment clearance.
The NGT had termed the government order illegal and imposed a penalty of Rs 76.19 crore on seven private builders in Tamil Nadu for raising housing complexes without environment clearance. But the SC later stayed the NGT order and allowed builders to carry on with construction activity despite not having green clearance.
A builder approached the court seeking to join the bandwagon of those benefiting from the stay and carrying on with construction activity. But this proved the proverbial last straw on the camel's back and the court ran out of patience. The Supreme Court on Friday termed housing projects without environment clearance illegal.
A bench of Chief Justice T S Thakur and Justice R Banumathi told senior advocate Rajiv Dutta, who appeared for a builder, Satila Sehkari Awas Samiti, “How can these huge projects be permitted to come up without prior environment clearance? The NGT appears to have passed the correct order.“ When Dutta said many build ers were carrying on construction activity after the SC's stay of NGT's order, the bench said, “We will post this petition along with the other pending petitions and examine vacation of the earlier order granting stay on NGT order.We prima facie feel it was a mistake to grant stay.“
Turning its attention to those carrying on with construction, the bench said, “There should be some respect for law. You have obtained stay and are merrily constructing. This is a doubled-edged problem. One, you are polluting the environment. Two, you are seducing innocent buyers with the promise of a home in a construction that is illegal.
“The court can have no sympathy for those who violate law and thy for those who violate law and pollute the environment. Least that should be done is to vacate the stay.
These are huge projects creating huge environmental problem.“ The bench rejected Dutta's request for issuance of notice on the petition and tagged it with other pending pleas.
On July 7, the NGT had quashed the 2012 Office Memorandum and the 2013 amendment to it and set up a high-powered body to supervise implementation of its order that all projects required prior environment clearance under the Environment Protection Act.
Green norms for projects up to 1.5L sqm eased
Dipak Dash, November 16, 2018: The Times of India
Exemption Not Applicable To Edu Institutes, Hospitals
The government has eased green norms for the building and construction sector where residential projects up to 1.5 lakh sqm builtup area will not require prior “environmental clearance.” The environment and forests ministry issued the notification, which the government claimed will quicken building construction permission in urban areas.
However, the environment ministry notification specifies that the prior green approval exemption will not be applicable for projects, including industrial sheds, educational institutions, hospitals and hostels. Urban local bodies such as municipalities will have the power to grant building permission, which may attract criticism from green activists in the country. However, such projects will have to fulfil “environmental conditions” through self declaration and certification while seeking building or construction permission from the local authorities. The built-up area has been defined as all covered areas, including basement and other service areas.
The “environmental conditions” will be integrated in building bye-laws of all the states and UTs. As part of fulfilling those conditions, the projects will have to use water efficient appliances, rainwater harvesting, waste management system, energy efficient systems, renewable power, maintain air quality and noise standards and other conditions. The municipal bodies will issue the completion certificate only after being satisfied that the laid down norms have been complied with by the builders or plot owners.
The ministry in a draft notification in March had proposed to increase the built up area to come under the prior green clearance regime from 20,000 m to 50,000 sq m. Now it has increased the covered area to 1.5 lakh sq meters. In the case of getting approval for township projects that have more that 1.5 lakh sq meters built-up area and up to 50 hectares, environment assessment report will be required.
The changes, say sources, have been made to streamline permissions for construction sector to meet the target of building more affordable houses for weaker sections. “It will help us improve our ranking in ease of getting construction permits,” housing and urban affairs secretary D S Mishra said.
Housing sales
‘Kuccha’ houses
Kuccha/ Kutcha means ‘raw’ or ‘incomplete.’ These are houses made of mud, thatch and other traditional materials.
People living in kuccha houses: First beneficiaries of Indira Awas Yojana
The Times of India, Jul 04 2015
2.37cr people still living in kuccha homes
One big number in the socio-economic caste census is 2.37 crore. This is the tally of rural households that lives in dwellings with “one or less room, kuccha walls and kuccha roof “.
The number of such households constitute 13.25% of the 17.91 crore rural households.
What makes the number important is the ongoing scheme that seeks to provide housing to the poor -Indira Awas Yojana.
The fresh finding lays the ground for targeting of families the census has found to be living in kuccha houses. It is evident that these households would be the first claimants for Indira Awas Yojana .
But they may just be `first among the unequals' since the Indira Awas Yojana target is the larger bloc of “below poverty line“ (BPL) and not just those who live with kuccha houses.
That BPL list of beneficiaries may not change much in the coming months since the Narendra Modi government has not yet decided on how to reconfigure the list of poor as is prevalent for last so many decades.
Legal position
Housing society not an industry even if it earns profit: HC
A housing society is not an industry, the Bombay high court has ruled. Justice Suresh Gupte, in an order, quashed a labour court’s order asking a housing society in Mumbai to reinstate a watchman whose services were terminated. The labour court had held that since the society earned a profit from the additional income that it earned from its members for displaying neon signs, it was an industry. The society said that the services provided by a watchman were personal in nature.
“Merely because the society levied some extra charges from a few of its members for display of neon signs, the society cannot be treated as an industry carrying on the business of hiring out of neon signs or allowing display of advertisements,” said Justice Gupte.
“The labour court appears to have been swayed by the fact that a few members of the society were carrying on businesses like coaching classes and a dispensary and the society was charging advertisement charges for the neon signs put up by the members. The labour court was of the view that since the society was earning income, it could not be termed as a mere housing society,” said the judge. The court said that when there are multiple activities carried out by an establishment, then what is to be considered is its dominant function.
Arihant Siddhi housing society in Borivli had terminated the services of its watctman when he turned 60 in 2000.
Loans
2012-13: accounts decrease but amount disbursed increases
Jan 03 2015
B Sivakumar
The housing market in 2013 seems to have catered to high-end users more than the middle class. As a result, while the number of housing loan accounts with commercial banks dropped by 2.7% between 2012 and 2013, the total amount disbursed through such loans increased by 7.3%, according to data just released by the Reserve Bank of India.
Realtors and bankers TOI spoke to felt the number of accounts had fallen due to the high price of real estate in cities, which was dissuading the lower income groups. On the other hand, the number of people going in for housing loan amounts ranging from Rs 2 crore to Rs 8 crore increased.
In 2012, the total number of housing loan accounts with all scheduled commercial banks was 47.78 lakh. In 2013, it came down to 46.43 lakh. During the same period, the total loan amount disbursed under this category increased from Rs 2.6 lakh crore to Rs 2.8 lakh crore.
The reduction in the number of accounts year-on-year is unusual. In 2011, the number of accounts was 47.32 lakh, which went up to 47.78 lakh in 2012, with the disbursed amount also increasing from Rs 2.5 lakh crore to Rs 2.6 lakh crore.
“There is a general perception that housing projects will be delayed and this has dissuaded many from investing in multi-storey apartments. The other reason could be the price of apartments in urban areas. The price of apartments within cities has not come down and only people who can afford in crores opt to invest in purchase of apartments,“ said Confederation of Real Estate Developers' Associations of India (Credai) Tamil Nadu chapter president NNandakumar.
Input costs have also increased by 8% to 25% in the last few years. This has increased construction costs and coupled with rising land prices, the cost of an apartment has also gone up significantly in urban areas, said Nandakumar. Almost all states and Union territories have seen a drop in the number of accounts. For example, Delhi had 1.41 lakh housing loan accounts in 2012 but in 2013, the number dropped to 1.06 lakh accounts. In Maharashtra, the number of accounts in 2012 was 83.67 lakh and it dropped to 83.60 lakh though the amount disbursed went up from Rs 83,674 crore to Rs 87,046 crore.
“The main reason for drop in housing loan accounts is the high price of property . Not many in the middle income group are able to afford houses in the city and there are many apartments with big builders awaiting customers,“ said Nallaperumal Pillai, chief manager of SBI personal banking division. Previously many would seek loan amounts ranging from Rs 15 to Rs 20 lakh but in the last few years, the amount has gone up to Rs 1 crore or more, said Pillai.
Interest subsidies
2015-18
Dipak Dash, Middle-class laps up home loan subsidies, November 29, 2018: The Times of India
From: Dipak Dash, Middle-class laps up home loan subsidies, November 29, 2018: The Times of India
Govt Scheme Sees 2-Fold Rise In 8 Mths
The number of urban middle-class home buyers availing Centre’s interest subsidy scheme to purchase or build their first home has more than doubled in the past eight months as compared to the 2017-18 financial year. According to estimates, the number of beneficiaries is likely to cross one lakh by March end.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi had announced interest subsidy for two categories of middle income groups (MIGs) in urban areas with annual income of up to Rs 18 lakh, which came into effect from January 2017. “We are expecting higher demand as more and more people submit their applications. In some cases, banks may not have taken that keen interest since they don’t see greater business. As government pays the entire interest subsidy of Rs 2.3 lakh upfront, the outstanding loan amount gets reduced and hence banks also get less interest,” said a source.
But he added the situation is changing fast as more builders are focussing on building flats that are affordable for MIGs and the home buyers have also become more demanding. The government has so far disbursed Rs 6,300 crore to 2.75 lakh beneficiaries as direct financial assistance under four different components to help people build a home or buy a flat, housing secretary D S Mishra said on Wednesday.
According to ministry’s data, majority of the beneficiaries, about 56%, availed the central assistance to build independent houses; 33% went for buying a flat and about 7% beneficiaries were the earlier slum dwellers who got a flat where they lived for years. Mishra said about 3.89 lakh dwelling units have already been completed for rehabilitating slum dwellers.
The ministry also claimed it has sanctioned 65 lakh houses under PM Awas Yojna (Urban) and 12 lakh houses have been completed in the past four years against only 18,000 completed during UPA-I and II. “We are confident of sanctioning 80 lakh out of the targeted one crore urban houses by March and complete about 25 lakh houses,” Mishra claimed.
Joint secretary (housing) Amrit Abhijat said the pace of delivery will increase since the works already started are at different stages of completion.
National Building Code (NBC)
2016
The Times of India, June 7, 2016
Ambika Pandit
The new National Building Code (NBC) will, for the first time, have a detailed chapter on making buildings and urban sites “accessible“ and “barrierfree“ for the elderly and persons with disabilities. Most buildings and public spaces are inaccessible to India's disabled, estimated at 2.68 crore, and the ministry of social justice and empowerment is keen to make “accessibility“ a focus area in the draft code.
The National Building Code, 2005, is under review and the draft is likely to be finalised soon. At a recent meeting of state ministers and secretaries (disability affa irs) here, the Union ministry said a dedicated chapter in the NBC will bolster efforts to address lack of access.
The NBC, which comes under the Bureau of Indian Standards, is not binding, but provides a national benchmark for construction activities. The code is adopted by state and local bodies. The draft chapter on accessibility says the requirements set out in the code “apply to all buildings and facilities open to and used by the public, including all forms of public housing by the governmentcivic bodies or private developers“. It does not apply to private residences.
The chapter takes into ac count a range of disabilities to make planning inclusive, including hearing disabilities, heart and lung diseases, and epilepsy . It elaborates that access would include planning designated cycleand motor-vehicle parking lots near a building's main entrance, accessible path to the entrance, appropriate external lighting, accessible external furniture (seats, bins etc), accessible information at the entrance to the site, suitable drop-off point near the main entrance, and easy access to information desks, lifts and toilet compartments.
The code also brings attention to the need for slipresistant walking surfaces, and important information communicated via two senses or more.
Number of buildings in India
2011: 30 crore buildings
Mar 02 2015
Census defines a house as a building or part of a building having a separate main entrance from a road, common courtyard, stairs and so on.According to the 2011 Census, there were about 30 crore such buildings in the country. About 71% were used for living, 7.5% were vacant, 5.3% were used as offices, shops while 2.6% were used for more than one purpose. India had about 30 lakh places of worship, a number higher than the combined total of schoolscolleges and hospitalsdispensaries.
Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY)
Ownership of PMAY house must be in the name of female member
Mantri: PMAY house must be in name of a female member, January 4, 2018: The Times of India
After pursuing the triple talaq bill aggressively in parliament, the BJP government, in yet another move to give the fair sex its due, has decided to make the ownership of a house under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) mandatory in the name of the female member of the family.
Confirming this, Union housing and urban development minister Hardeep Singh Puri said here on Wednesday that allotment of a house under PMAY will be subjected to entitlement in the name of a female family member only. “This would be another way to empower women,” he said.
Puri said that the Centre had already given its approval for the construction of 37.5 lakh housing units under PMAY. Approvals were given to 5.5 lakh units in December 2017, he said.
The UP government, too, has proposed to construct around 12 lakh housing units under PMAY. Under the scheme, the Centre and the state government are to give a subsidy of Rs 3 lakh to buyers.
The Union minister said that the land for the project would have to be provided by the state government while builders would construct the units. As a matter of fact, UP government is also toying with the idea of giving incentives to builders in the form of waiving development and land use charges for constructing PMAY houses.
“The project gains importance given the enormous housing need of people,” Puri said, adding that the demand had witnessed a significant rise in the wake of large-scale migration of people.
Puri said that the PMAY could also be a potential solution to large-scale illegal colonies which have been cropping up in the cities.
Size of the average house
2011: % of total households, one to six rooms+
See graphic, ' All India, %of total households '
2016: Most dwellings smaller than prison cell
Atul Thakur, Most Indians' living area smaller than prison cell, August 28, 2017: The Times of India
The majority of India's population, both rural and urban, lives in homes with space smaller than the minimum floor area per person recommended for prison cells. This shocking reality emerges from comparing the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) 69th round survey report on housing conditions with the Model Prison Manual 2016.
About 80% of the poorest rural households have an average floor area equal to or smaller than 449 sq ft. Since the average household size is 4.8 members in rural areas, this means 94 sq ft or less is available per person. This is smaller than the 96 sq ft of ground area recommended for prison cells.Of course, given India's overcrowded jails, prisoners may well have far less living space. Similarly , in urban areas, the poorest 60% of fam ilies live in houses that have an average floor area of 380sq ft or lower. With average household size of 4.1 members, the per capita space is 93sq ft for these houses, which again is lower than the recommended specifications for an ideal prison cell.
Of course, some households among these will have fewer than the average number of members or somewhat bigger homes and hence have more space per person than the average. So, the proportion of people with smaller living spaces than the model prison cell may not quite be 80% of the rural population and 60% of urban Indians.But, it is safe to say that despite these deviations, a majority live in such tiny spaces.
Expectedly , Dalits, adivasis have lesser space per person, as do families in poorer states. The per capita space available for scheduled caste people is 70.3sq ft while for scheduled tribes, it is 85.7 sq ft.Similarly , the poorest 20% have a per capita living space of 78sq ft in rural areas and 75sq ft in urban areas. For the richest 20%, the average is 102sq ft in rural areas and 135sq ft in urban areas.
The average floor area for rural households is lowest in Bihar -at 66sq ft. About 15 states and UTs have their rural population living in space more cramped than an ideal prison cell. In eight states, per person average floor area in cities, too, is lower than a cell.
The Model Prison Manual 2016 states that imprisonment doesn't convert a person to a non-person. The code states that the prison structure has to be designed and constructed in a way that provide all necessary facilities for prisoners to be treated as human beings and hence recommends the minimum size of a prison cell.
2017-18: apartments shrink
From: February 14, 2019: The Times of India
See graphic:
The size of new apartments offered by developers in major Indian cities, before and after 2017-18
The size of new apartments offered by developers has shrunk by 15-17% in the last 2 years across major Indian cities. Take, for instance, Mumbai. Before 2017-18, it saw builders offering 1,084 sq ft saleable area, which got reduced to just 809 sq ft area thereafter, which is a whopping 25 % decline.
Utilisation of Central funds
2017
UP slow in seeking funds to house poor: Centre, Feb 23, 2017: The Times of India
Challenging CM Akhilesh Yadav's development claims, the Centre has said UP has been one of the slowest in submitting proposals for housing for the poor despite having the highest shortfall.
“UP accounts for nearly 16% of the national housing shortage but the state submitted only 11,286 proposals. The Centre has approved them but these are a fraction of the shortage of 30.7 lakh houses in the state,“ urban development minister Venkaiah Naidu.
Its record of submissions is also the least among the four socalled BIMARU states. “Smaller states like Nagaland and Mizoram have got more houses sanctioned than UP under the PM Awas Yojna,“ he said.
Naidu's comments come amid a heated poll battle where BJP and SP-Congress are slugging it out with Akhilesh taking on PM Modi's attack that UP's development was both stunted and biased in favour of certain communities.
Naidu said the SP government had sent the proposals close to the election. “It is astonishing that the UP government did not send any proposals for long. We wrote 14 let ters seeking proposals. I also wrote to the CM. But still no result,“ Naidu said.
He said the state had been equally selective in power generation data and had for some time now stopped providing data on power cuts. “Imagine UP seeking and getting only Rs 384 crore out of the total Rs 25,819 crore. Isn't it plain and simple injustice to the poor of UP,“ Naidu asked.
Vacant houses
2017-18: Mumbai, Gurgaon top
Mumbai, Ggn have high share of houses lying vacant: Survey, January 30, 2018: The Times of India
Mumbai has the highest share of vacant houses among 19 major cities while Gurgaon ranks first in terms of the share of vacant houses to the residential stock in the city, according to the Economic Survey, which was presented in Parliament,
Quoting data from the Census of India 2011and the 2017 data of IDFC Institute, the report says Mumbai has 4.8 lakh vacant houses, followed by Delhi at three lakh and Bengaluru with equal number of vacant housing units. “In terms of share of vacant houses to total residential stock, Gurgaon ranks highest (26%),” the report says.
Gurgaon in the National Capital Region and Greater Mumbai are the two major real estate markets in the country. There have been reports of investors parking their money in the real estate sector and preferring not to rent them out.
The report points to unclear property rights, weak contract enforcement and low rental yields as important factors that are likely to have made landlords opting to keep their built houses vacant. It also says the spatial distribution of the new real estate may also be an issue as the vacancy rates generally increase with distance away from the denser urban areas.
Citing an example, the report says in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region, vacancy rates are higher in the districts of Thane and Raigad than in the denser “island city” and the suburbs.
See also
Housing: India
Housing and urban affairs: India
