Correct, But Not Quite Right: The Curious Case of the NBC’s Status

Language stands as one of humanity's most remarkable creations. It has continuously evolved over time, adapting to new contexts and shaping the way we connect with one another. Regardless of the script or region, language serves as a powerful medium for expressing thoughts, emotions, and ideas. Writers and poets have an extraordinary ability to harness its power—capturing deep emotions, narrating meaningful stories, and unravelling complex social and philosophical issues with insight and grace. Yet, this mastery is not confined to the literary world alone. Scientists, researchers, lawyers, and government officials often demonstrate exceptional skill in using language with precision and impact. Whether in speech or writing, the ability to communicate clearly and effectively remains one of the most valuable assets an individual can possess.

Sometimes, the way something is written can make an idea that is not entirely true feel remarkably convincing. Just as easily, even a purely factual message can be framed in a manner that unintentionally creates a misleading or unsettling impression. I recently came across an official communication from the Cabinet Secretariat of the Government of India, addressed to all State Chief Secretaries regarding the National Building Code. The facts it presented were accurate, and I genuinely believe it was issued with the best of intentions—for the greater good of the nation. Yet, the tone and choice of words gave me pause. It served as a powerful reminder that language, even when used to convey truth, can deeply influence how that truth is received. In this case, the communication risked casting shadows over an otherwise robust and well-established system. It illustrated how subtle shifts in expression can inadvertently undermine confidence and clarity, potentially impacting the orderly and safe development of our built environment. And so, it calls for a deeper look.

The National Building Code (NBC), published by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), is widely regarded as a foundational reference among engineers across India. Many professionals view it as a kind of bible for the design and construction of buildings. It brings together a wealth of knowledge, cutting-edge research, and established best practices into a single comprehensive framework. The process of developing these standards is both rigorous and inclusive—committees are composed of experts drawn from government agencies, industry, academia, and end-users. Drafts are circulated for public feedback before being finalized, ensuring transparency and broad consensus. These standards serve not only as a guide but also as a form of shield for practicing engineers. In fact, several court rulings have interpreted their adoption as effectively mandatory, further reinforcing their critical role in ensuring safety, consistency, and accountability in the built environment.

What many may not realize is that the National Building Code (NBC) and other BIS standards are recommendatory rather than mandatory. However, because they are issued by the Bureau of Indian Standards—the country’s national standards body—and developed through the expertise of professionals from across India, they carry significant weight. As a result, government regulatory bodies, departments, and local authorities commonly adopt them appropriately and give them legal force through various laws and regulations. While certain provisions—such as building height, ground coverage, and Floor Area Ratio (FAR)—are often adapted to regional requirements, the NBC remains the central guiding document. Any deviation from its provisions demands sound reasoning and justification. This approach has served the country well so far, and I genuinely hope it continues. The NBC plays a crucial role in ensuring that the growth of our built environment remains safe, sustainable, and harmonized. It addresses every dimension of safety—structural, fire, health, and life—and promotes best practices nationwide. As professionals, it is our responsibility to uphold the spirit in which these codes were created and to allow them to continue shaping our work for generations to come.

The recent communication from the Cabinet Secretariat rightly presents certain facts, yet its overall tone appears to undermine the importance and credibility of the National Building Code (NBC). In one part, the letter states: “...and hence non-compliance with the National Building Code does not constitute an offence.” This raises critical questions. Does this mean that unless the NBC or its provisions are formally adopted through building byelaws or regulations, violating them carries no legal consequence? If so, what happens when buildings constructed without adhering to the NBC turn out to be unsafe, unhealthy, or inconvenient—either in the short term or long run? Wouldn’t such non-compliance contribute to unsafe, unplanned, and unsustainable development?

The letter also correctly points out that matters related to ‘Land & Buildings’ and ‘Fire Services’ fall under the State List, granting states exclusive legislative and executive powers in these domains. It is indeed true that the central government does not have direct legislative authority over these subjects. However, even as a layperson in legal matters, it seems quite reasonable to believe that the Centre, or its institutions such as the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), retains the competence to recommend model documents—like the NBC—for adoption appropriately by states. After all, BIS represents the national standard-setting authority, drawing on expert input from across the country. This has, in fact, been the prevailing practice so far: the central government /BIS develops model codes, and states adopt them judiciously in the interest of public safety and sound development making suitable adjustments in view of regional needs. Is there now a shift in approach? Does this communication signal a departure from that convention? These are questions worth exploring. Because while the legal status of the NBC might be recommendatory, its role in shaping a safe, sustainable, and resilient built environment remains critical—and irreplaceable.

We must also recognize that many state governments and local bodies face limitations when it comes to developing comprehensive, research-based building byelaws. In several cases, technical expertise may be lacking, and the influence of vested interests cannot be ignored. As a result, these authorities often—by necessity—rely on the National Building Code (NBC) as a dependable foundation. However, the recent communication has unknowingly conveyed an impression that states are entirely free to draft their own building regulations for all aspects covered under the NBC. One line from the letter stands out: “Hence, building and matters like norms for Floor Area Ratio ….   setbacks, green areas, fire regulations, etc., as well as other aspects covered in the National Building Code are within the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the States.” This wording appears to suggest—perhaps unintentionally—that even provisions related to structural, fire, health, and life safety also fall  within state discretion. While this is technically correct, but this raises a serious concern: Do States now have liberty to revisit and modify these provisions? Do all states truly possess the requisite technical expertise to independently draft such critical safety standards? Do they have competence of the level of BIS? If not, the potential consequences could be far-reaching and deeply damaging.

While the letter may be factually correct from a legal standpoint, it overlooks the practical and professional realities on the ground. And therein lies the subtle but powerful beauty—and danger—of language. A technically accurate message, if phrased without care, can lead to interpretations that undermine well-established safeguards and best practices. In this case, it risks diluting the essential role the NBC plays in guiding safe, planned, and sustainable development across the country.

I would say the letter is correct, but not quite right—and therein lies the subtle power of language.

MANOJ MITTAL-JUNE 30,2025|NOIDA

Disclaimer:   The views and interpretations expressed herein are solely my own and are intended for educational and awareness purposes only. This content reflects my personal understanding and perspective on the subject, particularly emphasizing the significance of language in conveying concerns about building safety. It is not meant to criticize anyone or anything. It also does not represent the opinions of any affiliated institutions or organizations.

© This blog post is the intellectual property of MANOJ MITTAL. Unauthorized use or reproduction is prohibited.