Building-rule coverage across India
Exactly which states and union territories DevPartner holds a governed rule pack for, what its verification state is, and where the engine refuses to answer.
Coverage is read from the shared House of Alpha regulatory capability through the governed contract hoa.regulatory-coverage/v1. DevPartner does not author coverage truth. Where a jurisdiction is not verified, DevPartner fails closed and returns “Expert verification required” with the exact blocker rather than a number.
Source: hoa.regulatory-coverage/v1 (v1) — provider unavailable
The central HOA RC1 contract handoff is not frozen yet.
- Shared coverage contract not registered for this deployment
- No service identity provisioned
- Provider endpoint unresolved
The shared House of Alpha regulatory coverage capability is not connected to this deployment. The table below is DevPartner's local modelling snapshot, not governed coverage truth, and confers no verification authority.
36 states and union territories are listed in the local modelling snapshot. 12 rule packs are registered, of which 0 are verified for automated statutory answers. No jurisdiction is claimed on the basis of a summary, a consultant note or a secondary website.
Because the governed provider is unavailable, no jurisdiction is calculation-ready on this deployment: every statutory answer fails closed and asks for expert verification, whatever the snapshot status column says.
What each status means
| Verified for automated feasibility | Official source held and verified; the engine may return a definitive statutory answer. |
| Partially covered — expert verification required | Modelled from an official source, not yet verified. The engine fails closed on statutory answers. |
| Source acquired, verification pending | Source document held; extraction and human verification are incomplete. |
| Official source required | No official source location is recorded, so nothing is executable. |
| Superseded | A later instrument replaces this pack; it is retained as evidence only. |
| Unsupported — expert review required | No governed rule pack exists yet for this state or union territory. |
Coverage matrix
| State / UT | Authority | Rule pack | Effective | Status | Official source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andaman and Nicobar Islands | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Andhra Pradesh | APCRDA / VUDA / VMRDA / DTCP-AP | Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2017 (GO 119)v1.0.0 | 2017-03-28 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Arunachal Pradesh | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Assam | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Bihar | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Chandigarh | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Chhattisgarh | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Delhi | DDA / MCD / NDMC | Master Plan for Delhi 2021 + Unified Building Bye-laws, 2016v1.0.0 | 2007-02-07 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Goa | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Gujarat | AUDA / GUDA / SUDA / VUDA / RUDA | Gujarat Comprehensive GDCR, 2017v1.0.0 | 2017-05-01 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Haryana | DTCP-HR / HSVP / GMDA / FMDA | Haryana Building Code, 2017v1.0.0 | 2017-02-17 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Himachal Pradesh | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Jammu and Kashmir | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Jharkhand | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Karnataka | BDA / BBMP / DTCP-KA | Bengaluru RMP 2015 + Karnataka TCP Premium FAR & TDR Rules, 2016 | 2015-09-25 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Kerala | LSGD / Municipal Corporations / Panchayats | Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 2019v1.0.0 | 2019-02-08 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Ladakh | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Lakshadweep | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Madhya Pradesh | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Maharashtra | DTCP-MH / PMC / PCMC / NMC / NMMC (excl. MCGM) | Maharashtra UDCPR 2020 (excl. Mumbai MCGM / MMR) | 2020-12-02 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Maharashtra | MCGM (Greater Mumbai) | Mumbai DCPR 2034 — Greater Mumbai (MCGM) only | 2018-11-08 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Manipur | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Meghalaya | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Mizoram | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Nagaland | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Odisha | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Puducherry | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Punjab | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Rajasthan | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Sikkim | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Tamil Nadu | DTCP / CMDA | Tamil Nadu Combined Development & Building Rules, 2019 (working draft)v0.1.0-draft | 2019-02-04 | Source acquired, verification pending | Document |
| Telangana | GHMC / HMDA / DTCP-TS | Telangana Common Building Rules, 2012 (GO 168) + TS-bPASSv1.0.0 | 2012-04-07 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Tripura | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| Uttar Pradesh | LDA / GDA / NOIDA / GNIDA / VDA / KDA | UP Building Construction & Development Bye-laws, 2008v1.0.0 | 2008-09-22 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
| Uttarakhand | — | — | — | Unsupported — expert review required | — |
| West Bengal | KMC / KMDA / WBHIDCO | KMC Building Rules, 2009 (with amendments)v1.0.0 | 2009-04-01 | Partially covered — expert verification required | Document |
Where a jurisdiction is not verified
The feasibility engine will not substitute a national average, a neighbouring state's norm or a model bye-law for a missing rule. It returns the blocker and the source status, and the run is marked as requiring expert verification. You can still model the site by entering the FSI, coverage, setback and parking norms your competent authority or planning consultant confirms — the arithmetic remains deterministic and traceable.
Read the methodology for the source hierarchy, or speak to a development expert about a specific authority.