The State Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (BREAT) in Bihar has ruled that the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) lacks the autonomy to appoint "officers and employees" without collaboration with the state government. The verdict emerged from an appeal by a developer contesting an execution order involving a property transfer. BREAT highlighted RERA's inability to function like a private company. The ruling, specific to Bihar, could potentially influence similar appointments by RERAs nationwide. BREAT labelled the appointment of a senior legal consultant "illegal" and called for the verdict's dissemination to address the issue, shedding light on RERA's powers and government involvement.
.png)
In a significant ruling that casts a spotlight on the powers of Bihar's Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), the State Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (BREAT) has emphatically stated that RERA cannot autonomously appoint "officers and employees" akin to a "private limited company." Instead, such appointments must be made in collaboration with the state government, as per the tribunal's order. This verdict, while specific to Bihar, could potentially serve as a precedent to challenge similar appointments made by RERAs across the nation.
The verdict stemmed from an appeal lodged by a private developer contesting an execution order issued by a senior legal consultant, which mandated the turnover of an apartment to an individual named Asha Verma. Notably, the RERA bench, composed of its chairman and a member named Nupur Banerjee, had previously addressed Verma's complaint in September 2022.
In this earlier resolution, the builder was directed to transfer possession of the landowner's share of flats within a 30-day timeframe. This directive was based on a pre-existing agreement between the landowner and the builder that entitled Verma to eight apartments.
However, the builder only relinquished seven apartments, prompting Verma to seek the enforcement of the order via RERA. During the course of this enforcement process, the case was transitioned from RERA member Nupur Banerjee to Ved Prakash, a senior legal consultant within the authority. This decision by Prakash subsequently became the subject of challenge by the builder.
The builder's legal representative argued that the senior legal consultant did not possess the jurisdiction to preside over judicial proceedings. On the contrary, the RERA counsel contended that the transfer of the execution matter to the senior legal consultant was within the authority's purview, as it retained the ability to delegate responsibilities pertaining to execution matters.
However, BREAT contested this perspective and underscored that RERA does not possess the prerogative to autonomously appoint officers or employees. The tribunal unequivocally stated that only the state government, in conjunction with the authority, holds the jurisdiction to appoint such personnel. In a crucial observation, BREAT deemed the appointment of the senior legal counsel "illegal." Taking proactive steps to address this issue, BREAT directed the registrar to disseminate a copy of the verdict to the principal secretary of the urban development department.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
