GHMC, 26 ULBs told to demarcate vending zones, issue certificates

HYDERABAD: The MAUD department has directed the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) and 26 other Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), mostly in the Hyderabad periphery, to demarcate Street Vending Zones — green, amber and red — in all 30 GHMC circles. The demarcation process will involve the chief city planner and vending certificates will be issued to eligible street vendors.
Besides GHMC, the ULBs where demarcation is pending include Ghatkesar, Kompally, Peerzadiguda, Pocharam, Adibatla, Amangal, Bandlaguda Jagir, Jalpally, Kothur, Manikonda, Meerpet, Narsingi, Shamshabad, Shankarpally, Thukkuguda and Turkayamjal in Rangareddy district; and Toopran, Bhootpur, Haliya, Nakrekal, Nandikonda, Kosgi, Maktal, Khanapur, Manthani and Sultanabad.
Currently, the city lacks formally demarcated vending zones. A similar initiative taken nearly a decade ago in some parts of Hyderabad failed to take off due to various reasons. To support urban street vendors, Telangana MEPMA, a wing of MAUD, has asked all ULBs to implement the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.
Additionally, the department has asked the ULBs to facilitate financial aid to street vendors through banks, similar to the support provided to Self-Help Groups. Camps will be held to provide social security benefits to vendors and their families under SVANidhi se Samriddhi. Civic infrastructure in vending zones will also be developed to improve their socioeconomic well-being, officials said.
Instructions
Demarcate vending zones in GHMC and other ULBs in coordination with the Town Planning wing
Constitute regular Town Vending Committees as per the Telangana Street Vendor Rules, 2020, replacing provisional ones
Form provisional Town Vending Committees in newly formed ULBs with 11 official and non-official members
Conduct surveys through a mobile application to identify and cover all street vendors
Issue ID cards and vending certificates as per guidelines
Hold Town Vending Committee meetings monthly and prepare City Street Vending Plans in consultation with planning authorities
Ensure that any eviction or relocation of vendors is done in compliance with the rules

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Hindustan Times

2 hours ago

• Hindustan Times

MahaRERA orders Lodha Developers to refund booking amount of NRI homebuyers after home loan rejection for Mumbai project

The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has directed Lodha Developers (formerly Macrotech) to refund the booking amount to NRI homebuyers who cancelled their reservation after being unable to secure a home loan for a ₹ 2.27 crore apartment in their Lodha Mulund project in Mumbai. The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has directed Lodha Developers (formerly Macrotech) to refund the booking amount to NRI homebuyers who cancelled their reservation after being unable to secure a home loan. (Picture for representational purposes only)(Pexels) The couple had paid ₹ 7 lakh upfront, 'relying' on the developer's oral assurance that the amount would be fully refunded if their loan application failed. After informing Lodha of their loan rejection and requesting cancellation, they were allegedly denied the refund, prompting them to approach MahaRERA, which has now ruled in their favour. The two homebuyers, Vaibhav Kishor Ambukar and his wife Seema Ambukar, had booked a flat in 'Lodha Mulund Project Tower 1' by paying a booking amount of ₹ 7 lakh in two instalments in September and October 2021. The couple, residing abroad (Russia at the time of booking), made it clear at the time of booking that their ability to buy the flat was contingent upon securing a home loan. According to the homebuyers, Lodha's representatives had orally assured them that in case of loan rejection or a financial emergency, the booking amount would be refunded without deductions. However, after the loan application was rejected in November 2021, due to documentation challenges and the complainant's contractual employment abroad, Lodha allegedly refused to cancel the booking or process a refund. Developer's defence The developer- Lodha Group contended that the booking was governed by an application form signed on November 18, 2021, which included a clause (Clause 3.5) allowing the forfeiture of booking amounts — up to 10% of the total consideration — in case of cancellation. The developer maintained that the complainants had signed the application form after fully understanding the terms. Also Read: Maharashtra Tribunal backs homebuyers, orders Lodha Group to register portion of New Cuffe Parade Project with MahaRERA MahaRERA's order The MahaRERA, in its order dated June 10, 2025, stated that no formal agreement for sale had been executed between the parties. The Authority found the forfeiture clause to be 'one-sided, unconscionable, and unenforceable' and held that the refund denial violated the spirit of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. 'The complainants' reason for withdrawal stemmed from a genuine financial crisis, not mala fide intent. The application form itself appeared partially filled and unsigned by Lodha's sales representatives. Moreover, it was signed just nine days before the refund request was made,' the order said. Following this, the MahaRERA ordered Lodha to refund ₹ 6.65 lakh to the homebuyers by July 15, 2025. The order said that if the timeline is not adhered to, the refund will attract interest at 2% above the State Bank of India (SBI)'s highest marginal cost of lending rate. Also Read: Over 29,000 complaints filed by homebuyers against 5,500 real estate projects in Maharashtra: MahaRERA data Additionally, the MahaRERA directed the developer to compensate homebuyers with ₹ 20,000 towards the cost of the complaint. Meanwhile, an email query sent to Lodha Developers did not receive a response. If a response is received, the story will be updated. Homebuyers should not rely on oral assurances According to legal experts, homebuyers should not rely on any oral submissions or assurances by the developer or its representative. "Homebuyers must exercise extreme caution and avoid relying on verbal promises or assurances from developers or their representatives when booking a flat, as such oral agreements lack legal enforceability under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) and the Indian Contract Act, 1872," said Sonam Chandwani, Managing Partner KS Legal & Associates. "A clear, written contract detailing refund policies, contingencies, and obligations is essential to safeguard against developers' potentially unfair practices," Chandwani said. Also Read: MahaRERA update: Maharashtra regulator surpasses 50,000 project registrations in 8 years Sanjay Chaturvedi, a Mumbai-based lawyer whose firm represented the homebuyers in MahaRERA, said, "The delivery of the home is always with the developer, and he can sell it either to the first buyer or any successive buyer. Then why deduct or forfeit any token amount? Such practices discourage honest homebuyers and are bad for the industry. This is a very well-adjudged order." Chaturvedi said his client was working in Russia at the time of booking and currently works in Dubai.

Indian Express

7 hours ago

• Indian Express

UP govt revises SOP to boost financial autonomy of urban local bodies

The Uttar Pradesh Urban Development Department has revised the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) outlining financial and administrative powers of urban local bodies (ULBs) in the state. Under the new guidelines, Nagar Panchayats will now be empowered to independently sanction development projects up to Rs 1 crore, while municipal Councils can undertake projects worth up to Rs 2 crore. This marks a significant jump from the earlier limit of Rs 40 lakh set in the 2021 SOP. Officials said the updated SOP is part of a broader set of reforms aimed at promoting decentralisation, improving transparency, and strengthening urban governance. One of the key changes allows the use of interlocking tiles on roads up to 3.75 metres in width, an infrastructure upgrade that aligns with modern urban planning needs. In addition to enhancing financial autonomy, the revised SOP has also introduced stronger accountability mechanisms. If a construction project is found to be substandard, 50% of the cost recovery will be borne by the contractor, while the remaining 50% will be recovered from the concerned engineers and administrative officials of the respective ULB. The district magistrate will oversee this recovery process. Urban local bodies have also been instructed to maintain ward-wise road directories and conduct GIS mapping of existing infrastructure to aid in more efficient future planning. 'It is a step towards reforms and would improve the quality and effectiveness of urban governance and at the same time increase transparency. These revised SOP norms also aim to promote decentralization,' claimed Amrit Abhijat, Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department.

Time of India

8 hours ago

• Time of India

Homebuyers in Bengaluru feel betrayed as builders flout Rera orders with impunity

Bengaluru: For thousands of homebuyers across the city, the dream of owning a home has turned into a never-ending legal and financial nightmare. Despite securing favourable rulings from the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Rera), many buyers allege that builders are openly flouting the law with no consequences, while govt agencies look the other way. From construction delays and refund refusals to outright defiance of Rera compensation orders, aggrieved buyers say enforcement is virtually non-existent. What began as a hopeful investment has, for many, turned into a fight for justice that drags on for years. Gopal Agarwal, a 47-year-old chartered accountant based in Whitefield, invested in a project back in 2012 with the promise of possession by 2015. He finally received the flat only in 2019. The builder initially agreed to pay Rs 10 lakh in compensation but later backed out. Agarwal approached Rera, which passed a favourable order in Oct 2022. "I'm still running around for execution (of the order). I've visited the deputy commissioner and tahsildar offices more than a hundred times. Even the high court directed the DC to recover the money within eight weeks — nothing happened. The builder managed to get a stay and I'm back to square one. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Buy Brass Laxmi Ji Idol For Wealth, Peace & Happiness Luxeartisanship Shop Now Undo Rera is doing its job, but it's toothless without enforcement powers. Revenue officers don't act," he said. Govind Narayan, a 36-year-old resident of Jalahalli, booked a flat near Electronics City in 2018. Possession was initially promised by Aug 2022, later revised to March 2024. However, construction stopped in 2022 and hasn't resumed since. "Every time we contact the builder, we're told 'work will start tomorrow'. It's the same excuse every time. I've invested Rs 37 lakh — my entire savings — and have no home, no returns. The flat's market value is now more than Rs 80 lakh. Even after winning a Rera case and receiving a revenue recovery certificate, there's no enforcement," Narayan said. Businessman Sudhakar Lakshmanaraja said that despite a 2021 Rera order to recover Rs 46 lakh from a well-known builder, there has been zero progress. "I've approached everyone — the PMO, CM, housing department, human rights commission — but to no avail. Officers pass the buck. Meanwhile, these fraudulent builders are still operating. What message are we sending to honest citizens?" he asked. According to data from Rera, 796 enforcement orders have been issued since the Act came into effect. Homebuyers' associations estimate that while roughly 50% of these involve builder refunds, nearly 30% of those refunds are stuck because of non-compliance. Dhananjaya Padmanabhachar, convener of Karnataka Homebuyers Forum, said: "Rera needs its own revenue collection officer with powers to attach properties of defaulters. Paper orders without enforcement mean nothing to homebuyers." A senior Rera official admitted the authority's limitations: "We don't have the power to recover money. That lies with the govt. We can pass orders, but without execution powers, enforcement suffers."