As per case facts, petitioners challenged directions issued under the RERA Act and an in-principle approval for an Occupation Certificate concerning a group housing project. The project, 'Windchants', faced delays ... and allegations of non-compliance with sanctioned plans, including illegal EWS units and improper registration under RERA. The builder phased the project and obtained OCs after RERA's commencement without proper registration. Petitioners raised objections, arguing that impugned directions prioritized state laws over RERA and diluted RERA's provisions regarding plan alterations. The question arose whether the RERA Act or state specific real estate laws, particularly regarding demolition powers and project alterations, should take precedence, and if RERA authorities could order demolition for deviations. Finally, the High Court found no merit in the writ petition, dismissing it. The court clarified that RERA authorities do not have the power to order demolition for deviations from sanctioned plans, and such powers rest with municipal or town planning departments. It also noted that various state laws have distinct fields of operation without direct inconsistency with RERA on these specific matters, and petitioners could appeal OC decisions to the competent authority or seek compensation under other laws.