Judgment :

Krishna Rao, J.

1. The petitioners have filed the present writ application challenging the orders passed by the respondent no. 2 on 3rd July, 2023 and 31st July, 2023, which reads as follows:

“4. Therefore, considering all the above and in continuation of the order dated 03.07.2023 passed in the matter, it is hereby ordered that:

(i) The promoter shall pay to the petitioners mentioned in para 3 above, a compensation which will be the amount equal to 10% of the purchase value of their respective flats with a simple interest @12% from the date of making over possession of the flat to the respective petitioner to the date of paying the compensation. This amount may also be set of against pending payments on the part of the petitioners, if any, in which case interest will not be applicable on the amount so set off. The payment will have to be made within three months from the date of this order.

(ii) The promoter shall pay to the petitioners mentioned in para 3 above, further compensation at the rate of 12% per annum (simple interest) on the total payment received from the respective petitioners till the completion date mentioned in their agreements for the period commencing from the date following the date of completion as specified in the agreement to the actual date of handover of possession of the flat, and such compensation may be adjusted against any pending payment from the respective petitioner to the promoters. The payment in this regard will also have to be made within three months of the date of this order.

(iii) In the event of the promoters not paying the compensations as determined under paragraphs (i) and (ii) above within the time stated therein, the petitioners may file complaint with the appropriate authority for taking action against the promoters in terms of Section 13 of the Promoters Act, 1993, if they are so advised, in addition to taking recourse to any other remedy as may be available under the laws for realising the compensation amount.”

2. The ground of filing the present writ petition against the impugned orders is Coram non-judice. The contention of the petitioners is that the respondent no.2 has passed the impugned orders under the West Bengal Building (Regulation of Promotion of Construction and Transfer by Promoters) Act, 1993 but the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Forum for People’s Collective Efforts (FPCE) and Another Vs. State of West Bengal and Another reported in (2021) 8 SCC 599 has repealed the said Act upon enactment of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “RERA”).

3. The petitioner no.1 was registered as a “promotor” in terms of Section 3(5) of the West Bengal Building (Regulation of Promotion of Construction and Transfer by Promoters) Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1993) and the petitioner no. 2 is the Director of the petitioner no.1 company.

4. As per permission granted by the Authorized Officer under the Act of 1993 on 30th June, 2005, the petitioners have constructed buildings consisting of 64 flats and 45 Car parking spaces at the Premises No. 196D/2, Picnic Garden Road, Kolkata- 700039. The private respondent nos. 4 to 10 have entered into and executed separate individual agreements with the petitioners for purchase of their respective flats.

5. A dispute arose between the petitioners and the private respondents with regard to the flats delivered to the private respondents. The private respondents made complaint before the concern authority under Section 6 of the Act of 1993 on the allegation that the area of the flats delivered by the petitioners was not according to the agreement and the common area of 3 cottahs of land was surreptitiously sold by the petitioners. The concern authority had passed an order under Section 6 of the Act of 1993 by partly allowing the complaint filed by the private respondents. Being aggrieved with the said order, the private respondents had filed Revisional Application under Section