RWAs raise concerns over Telangana CURE Bill 2026, seek wider consultation

Resident Welfare Associations have raised objections to Telangana's proposed CURE Bill 2026, seeking wider consultation and scientific evaluation. They have flagged concerns over property tax calculations, building permission cancellations, utility restrictions and protection of apartment owners from developer defaults.

Hyderabad: Resident Welfare Associations (RWAs) have raised concerns over the CURE Draft Bill 2026, calling for wider consultations and a scientific study before finalising it. On July 5, the Telangana government proposed the CURE Bill-2026, intended to replace the 1955 GHMC Act, and invited suggestions and objections till July 24.

According to a member of United Federation of RWAs (UFERWAS), nearly 2,000 representations have so far been submitted online and in writing to the State government.

---

Objections were raised to Section 76 of the Bill with the RWAs stating the tax should not be determined solely based on Capital (Guideline) Value and the assessment should also consider the age and depreciation of the building, built-up area, occupancy status, nature of usage and the level of municipal services provided.

On Section 79 of the Bill, the RWAs maintained that property tax revisions should be based on objective criteria, public consultation and measurable improvements in civic infrastructure and municipal services.

RWAs also objected to Section 161 regarding cancellation of building permission and said that cancellation should not automatically result in coercive action against apartment owners. Liability for such violations should remain with the developer or promoter.

Regarding Section 165, the proposed 24-hour notice before sealing was stated as inadequate for large apartment communities and RWAs sought a minimum notice period of 30 days.

RWAs also objected to Section 167 of Restriction on Utility Connections and said water supply, sewerage and electricity to occupied residential apartments should not be disconnected solely because of the developer’s default. Enforcement action should instead be directed against the developer.