In this exclusive interaction with TITTO EAPEN, HARRISH KUMAR JAIN, Founder, Brihanmumbai Developer Association (BDA), speaks on why Mumbai needs a new collective voice, why the approval ecosystem is bleeding the city dry, why reverse migration is real, and why the developer of tomorrow will not be a builder — but a service provider.
Q. Mumbai already has CREDAI, NAREDCO, MCHI and other established bodies. Why did you feel the need to create BDA? Isn’t the ecosystem already crowded?
Let me be clear — I have great respect for CREDAI, NAREDCO, MCHI and other trade bodies. I am a member of some of them. They have done valuable work and they represent the larger, macro issues of the industry. But Mumbai is different from every other real estate market in India.
Mumbai is not a greenfield market. It is a redevelopment market. Here, a developer is dealing with society redevelopment, slum rehabilitation, MHADA, SRA, BMC, CRZ, ward-level approvals, tenants, heritage issues, DCPR, premiums and dozens of hyper-local challenges. A broad-based association can raise industry-level issues, but it cannot always address the micro pain of a small or medium developer in Borivali, Bhandup or Byculla.
Second, small and medium developers are the backbone of Mumbai’s redevelopment. They are the ones executing society-level, cluster-level and slum-level projects. But their voice often remains scattered. They needed a platform where all voices can become one collective voice.
That is why BDA was formed. It is not against anyone. It is Mumbai-specific, micro-focused and developer-centric — especially for small and medium developers. BDA complements the larger trade bodies. They handle the macro; we handle the micro. They speak for the industry; we speak for Mumbai’s local development ecosystem.
If Mumbai’s redevelopment has to move faster, the small and medium developer must be heard, protected and strengthened. BDA is that platform.
Q. The industry is witnessing serious consolidation. Big Branded Developers and Corporate Players are entering micro-markets that were dominated by home-grown brands for decades. How do you see this transformation? And how much will small and medium developers resist it?
I don’t see it as a takeover. I see it as a market correction and an evolution. Big players will dominate certain segments — large townships, premium projects, capital-intensive redevelopment. That is a fact. But a micro-market is not just land and FSI. It is people, societies, tenants, local relationships, trust, approvals and decades of goodwill. That is where home-grown developers have a natural edge.
Will there be resistance? Some resistance is natural. But resisting change is dangerous. Smart small and medium developers are not resisting corporates — they are partnering with them through JVs, co-development, profit-sharing and asset-light models. They are upgrading their systems, compliance, branding, delivery and customer service. Those who cling to old ways will struggle.
Let me also give you the larger context. Consolidation is not Mumbai-specific. In 2015, by some estimates, there were over five lakh developers across India. Today, that number may have come down to around fifty thousand serious players. Why did this happen? Demonetization wiped out the cash-driven miscreants and fly-bynight operators. RERA wiped out the non-serious players. GST pushed out the non-compliant. NCLT brought down over-leveraged brands. And COVID was the final nail for those who failed to understand the new Indian homebuyer — far more informed, digital, demanding and aspirational.
Ultimately, the market is led by the home buyer. The buyer decides who wins. Today’s buyer is informed, digital, aspirational and ruthless about trust. He will choose a big brand only if it delivers. He will also choose an unknown local developer if that developer offers a better product, better service and a better ecosystem.
Big or small, branded or unbranded — the foundational tenets of real estate have changed. Those who still think they only build structures and sell square feet, no matter how big they are, will fall. The industry is in transition. We are moving from real estate development to real estate service and hospitality. The developer is no longer just a builder; he is a curator of a lifestyle and a manager of an ecosystem.
Those who build an ecosystem along with their buildings — community, convenience, healthcare, education, retail, wellness, property management, post-possession service — and have the ability to service that ecosystem will flourish, no matter how small they are. Size gives you scale, but service gives you survival and success.
So the question is not big versus small. The question is old versus new. BDA’s role is to prepare small and medium developers for exactly this future. BDA must help them upgrade, comply, collaborate and scale. It must facilitate JVs, co-development, capital access, knowledge sharing and policy representation. It must be the bridge between local expertise and institutional capital. And it must ensure that consolidation does not become monopolization.
Q. Let’s come to the most uncomfortable question before Mumbai today. The approval ecosystem and the cost of approvals are among the highest in the country. A 46-plus approval maze. Average approval cost crossing ₹5,000 per sq ft in many projects. How do developers and buyers sustain this? And what does it mean for Mumbai’s future?
This is the most uncomfortable question before Mumbai today. And let me say it plainly: the high cost of approvals is not a tax on developers. It is a tax on every homebuyer, every tenant, every skilled professional, and ultimately on Mumbai’s future competitiveness.
The 46-approval maze is not a figure of speech. A developer today runs from BMC to MHADA to SRA to MMRDA to the Environment Department to CRZ to Fire to AAI to Heritage to Tree Authority to Traffic Police to Water to Sewerage to Electricity to Labour to RERA to GST and more. Each authority has its own fee, its own timeline, its own NOC, its own renewal. When you add FSI premiums, fungible FSI, DCPR premiums, staircase premiums, parking premiums, fire premiums, water and sewerage charges, labour cess, GST, stamp duty and registration, the approval-and-premium load can cross ₹5,000 per sq ft in many Mumbai projects. In prime zones, it is even higher. And all of this is before a single brick is laid.
Who bears this cost? The developer does not absorb it. He cannot. It is passed on to the buyer. The buyer either pays a higher price, buys a smaller home, moves to the periphery, or leaves Mumbai altogether. That is the reality.
The government’s rationale is not wrong — but the model is incomplete. The government is building infrastructure at a scale that no other part of the world is witnessing. But as a developer, I have to ask: for whom are we building this infrastructure? If the cost of approvals and premiums pushes the common Mumbaikar to Palghar, Boisar, Vasai-Virar, Panvel, Kalyan or Dombivli, then the infrastructure is being built for those who can afford the city’s high cost — not for the talent that makes the city run.
And here is the hard truth. Mumbai has failed to build a new IT or commercial town in 50 years. The only marquee CBD we have created is BKC. And even there, large parcels of land have remained unsold or auctions have been deferred because the reserve price plus construction cost makes the end product uncompetitive. Office rentals in BKC are among the highest in India. Compare that with Bengaluru, Hyderabad or Pune, where Grade A office space is available at a fraction of that cost.
That is why start-ups are going to Hyderabad, Bengaluru and NCR. The fintech companies may keep a small head office in Mumbai, but their large software engineering centres, product teams, R&D and back-office talent are operating from other parts of the country. Mumbai has finance, media, entertainment, trade and port. But it has not become a tech or innovation city. And the reason is not talent. The reason is cost.
Reverse migration is already happening. Post-COVID, remote and hybrid work has changed the game. Skilled professionals have realised they can earn a similar salary in Pune, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Indore, Jaipur, Kochi, Coimbatore or Nashik, and pay onethird or one-fourth of Mumbai’s rent or EMI. The salary gap has narrowed. The housing cost gap has not. Mumbai is among the least affordable housing markets in the world. Rental in South Mumbai or Bandra for a decent 2BHK can be ₹1 lakh to ₹2 lakh per month. The same quality of life in Pune, Bengaluru or Hyderabad may cost ₹30,000 to ₹60,000. That is a threefold to fourfold difference. No salary premium can sustain that forever.
Q. So what is the way forward?
The government needs a pragmatic view. I am not against infrastructure. I am not against premium recovery. But the model has to change. The government must treat the developer as a partner in nation-building, not as a revenue extraction machine.
Some practical solutions. First, single-window, time-bound, deemed approval. If an authority does not respond in 30 days, the approval should be deemed. This one reform can cut project timelines by 30 to 40 per cent. Second, rationalise premiums and FSI costs. Link them to affordable housing and infrastructure outcomes, not to the maximum revenue the government can extract. Third, create new commercial and IT townships with affordable land. Not just BKC. Navi Mumbai, Thane, Kalyan, Panvel, Virar, Alibaug and the MMR need self-sustaining commercial ecosystems with mass transit. Fourth, promote transit-oriented development. Density around metro and rail stations must be increased, with affordable housing and rental housing. Fifth, recover infrastructure cost through land value capture, not through homebuyer premiums. When the government builds a metro, land values rise. Capture that value through betterment charges, not by taxing every square foot of new housing. Sixth, reform MHADA, SRA and redevelopment approvals. These are the backbone of Mumbai’s housing supply, and they are drowning in multiple approval maze.
The government must understand: a developer is not the enemy. A developer is the delivery mechanism for the government’s own vision of housing and urban renewal. If approvals become enablers instead of obstacles, Mumbai can compete with Bengaluru, Hyderabad and NCR. If not, the reverse migration will only accelerate. And that will be a loss not just for real estate, but for Mumbai itself.
Q. For outsiders, real estate looks like a cartel or a lobby. For insiders, it is still a fragmented sector. NAREDCO, MCHI and CREDAI all have their own voices. How critical is a collective voice? And how will BDA bridge that gap in Mumbai?
Let me answer this as both a developer and a student of this industry. A collective voice is not a luxury. It is survival. In real estate, policy decides viability — FSI, premiums, approvals, DCPR, RERA, GST, redevelopment rules, MHADA and SRA norms. If you do not have a seat at the table, you are on the menu. So yes, a collective voice is absolutely critical.
But let me also address the “cartel” perception honestly. Real estate cannot be a cartel. A cartel needs homogeneous products, controlled supply and price coordination. Real estate is the opposite. Every project is unique. Every micro-market is different. Every developer competes brutally on land, capital, approvals, talent and buyers. The perception of a cartel comes from opacity — from the old days of cash, delays and lack of transparency. The answer is not to hide behind associations. The answer is transparency, data, delivery and consumer trust. A collective voice must be a reform lobby, never a price-fixing lobby.
Now, for insiders, the sector is fragmented. And it is fragmented for good reason. A small redevelopment developer in Bhandup, a large listed builder in BKC, a slum rehabilitation player in Malad, and a luxury developer in South Mumbai do not have the same problems. CREDAI, NAREDCO, MCHI and other bodies have their own mandates and strengths. I respect them. I am a member of some. They represent the macro industry. They represent large issues. But Mumbai’s micro-market developer — the small and medium builder doing society redevelopment, cluster projects and local housing — often does not have one sharp, Mumbai-specific, micro-focused voice. That is the gap BDA fills.
How will BDA bridge this gap? Not by fighting other associations. Not by duplicating them. Not by ego. BDA will bridge it by becoming the Mumbai-specific micro-platform and by building a federation of voices around a common minimum agenda.
First, BDA will complement, not compete. CREDAI, NAREDCO and MCHI can speak on national and broad policy. BDA will speak on Mumbai’s ward-level, society-level and redevelopment-level reality. We will be the voice of the small and medium developer who is actually executing Mumbai’s redevelopment.
Second, BDA will create a common minimum agenda with other associations. Single-window approvals. Rationalisation of premiums. Time-bound NOCs. DCPR clarity. SRA and MHADA reform. Transit-oriented development. Affordable housing. These are not any specific association issues. These are Mumbai issues. On these, we must speak together.
Third, BDA will build joint task forces and shared data. One of the biggest weaknesses of our sector is that we do not have credible micro-market data on approval costs, timelines, premiums and project viability. BDA will create a research and data cell. When we go to BMC, MHADA, SRA, MMRDA or the state government, we will go with facts, not complaints.
Fourth, BDA will be the bridge between small and big, local and institutional. Consolidation is happening. Big players are entering micro-markets. BDA will help small developers upgrade, comply, collaborate and form JVs. We will ensure that local expertise is not wiped out, but partnered with institutional capital.
Fifth, BDA will build consumer trust. A collective voice is only credible if it stands for the homebuyer. We will promote a code of conduct, transparency, dispute resolution and post-possession service. The developer of tomorrow is not a seller of square feet. He is a curator of an ecosystem. BDA will prepare its members for that future.
Q. Where do you see Mumbai real estate by 2030? And where do you see BDA in it?
I will answer this with great predictability, because the direction is already clear. By 2030, Mumbai will not be compared with other Indian cities. It will be competing with Singapore, Dubai and London as a global luxury real estate market. That is not a wish. That is the inevitable consequence of the infrastructure being built — Atal Setu, the Coastal Road, the Metro network, the Bullet Train, Navi Mumbai International Airport, the new port at Vadhavan. When you connect a city like this at this scale, global capital follows. Global capital follows global standards. And global standards will redefine Mumbai.
But the new order will not be just about price per square foot. There will be a completely new rulebook. Three forces will dominate: sustainability, net carbon, and climate resilience. Mumbai is a coastal city. It is vulnerable. The developer of 2030 cannot just build glass towers and ignore the sea, the floods, the heat, the waste, the energy. Every new project will be judged on its carbon footprint, its water management, its waste recycling, its resilience to extreme weather. Green certifications will not be a marketing brochure — they will be a licence to operate.
The second big shift is that real estate will become more like a service industry. We are already seeing it. The developer is no longer a seller of square feet. He is a curator of lifestyle, a manager of community, a provider of hospitality. By 2030, the most valuable developers will not be the ones with the largest land banks. They will be the ones with the best post-possession service, the strongest ecosystem — healthcare, education, retail, wellness, co-working, mobility — and the ability to manage that ecosystem efficiently. The line between real estate, hospitality and facility management will blur. That is the future.
Where does BDA fit in this? BDA will be the forerunner in that transition. We will not wait for 2030 to react. We will prepare our members today.
First, BDA will become the platform for sustainable development standards in Mumbai. We will work with experts, government and global bodies to create practical, Mumbai-specific guidelines on net carbon, climate resilience, water and waste management. We will train small and medium developers to adopt them. We will certify and recognise those who lead.
Second, BDA will champion the shift from developer to service provider. We will create knowledge series, workshops and best-practice sharing on post-possession management, community building, hospitality, and ecosystem creation. We will help our members upgrade their skills, their teams and their mindset.
Third, BDA will be the bridge between local developers and global capital. By 2030, Mumbai will attract sovereign funds, pension funds, REITs and global developers. BDA will ensure that small and medium developers are not wiped out. We will facilitate JVs, co-development, and asset-light partnerships. We will make sure that local expertise partners with global capital, rather than being replaced by it.
Fourth, BDA will be the voice of Mumbai’s micro-markets in the new global order. The big policy battles of 2030 will be about climate finance, green premiums, transit-oriented density, rental housing, and redevelopment of old buildings. BDA will be at the table, with data, with solutions, and with a unified voice.
So, where do I see Mumbai real estate by 2030? I see a city that is more global, more sustainable, more service-driven, and more expensive — but also more liveable if we get it right. And where do I see BDA? Right at the centre of that transition. Not as a spectator. Not as a complaining lobby. But as a forerunner — leading the small and medium developer into a new era of sustainability, service and global competitiveness.
That is the future I am working for. That is the future BDA will help build.
“The government must understand: a developer is not the enemy. A developer is the delivery mechanism for the government’s own vision of housing and urban renewal.”
