The court upheld that the High Court can only waive mandatory pre-deposit under extreme hardship; the Real Estate Authority retains jurisdiction for directing refunds and interest, separate from adjudicating injuries or compensation.

JUDGMENT

Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. - The two questions that arise for consideration in the present batch of petitions relates to the jurisdiction of Authority to direct refund of the amount with/without of interest and the power of High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to relax the condition of pre-deposit under Section 43(5) of RERA Act, 2016.

2. By this common order, we intend to dispose of a batch of writ petitions involving common questions of law. To demonstrate the similarity of issues, reference to the prayers from lead case of each batch have been extracted. The said writ petitions have been filed by respective Companies against the orders passed by the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective developers have submitted that the averments contained in the various writ petitions filed on behalf of the respective developers are identical to their lead cases and stands corroborated by learned counsel appearing for respondent-HSIIDC. The counsel appearing for the petitioners in all the matters also submitted that they have not raised any challenge to the vires of statutory provision under Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulatory and Development) Act 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2016) and instead seek to invoke the indulgence of the Writ Court since the condition of pre-deposit is onerous. The extra ordinary jurisdiction is being invoked to obviate the hardship faced by the petitioners.

FACTS

1st Batch (Ramprastha Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd.)

3) Reference to the facts of the case is made from CWP No.6688 of 2021.

The petitioner herein has made the following prayers:-

a) issue a writ in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the Real Estate Regulatory Authority to not proceed with Execution Proceedings dated 01.12.2020 (Annexure P-9) as the same are being carried out in respect of an order dated 20.02.2020 (Annexure P-6), which itself had been passed illegally and without jurisdiction, more particularly in view of the orders dated 05.11.2020 (Annexure P-15) passed by the Honble Supreme Court.

b) Issue a writ in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the Ld. Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, respondent No.3, to entertain the Appeal of the petitioner against order dated 20.02.2020 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No.4, without requiring the petitioner to first deposit with the Appellate Tribunal the amount to be paid to the Allottee, as per the aforementioned order of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Respondent No.4, thereby waiving the condition of pre-deposit as mandated by Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016;

c) issue a writ in the nature of CERTIORARI, seeking quashing of order dated 20.02.2020 (Annexure P-6) passed by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Respondent No.4, in Complaint No.2785; titled as Geeta versus Ramprastha Developers and Promoter Pvt. Ltd., the same besides being, inter alia, illegal and arbitrary, is also without jurisdiction inasmuch as respondent No.4 has misdirected itself in entertaining and deciding the Complaint filed on behalf of Respondent Nos.5, especially when the same had been filed in such form/manner and/or seeking such relief, which as per the scheme of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 could only be said to be maintainable before the Adjudicating Officer and not before the Real Estate Regulatory Authority;

d) issue a writ in the nature of CERTIORARI, seeking quashin