IMPORTANT POINT
The Real Estate Regulatory Authority is recognized as a quasi-judicial tribunal under Article 227, enabling judicial review of its orders.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH MATHUR, J.

1. Heard Mr. Kartikey Dubey, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. Shobhit Mohan Shukla, learned counsel for opposite party No. 1.

2. In view of order being proposed to be passed, notices to opposite party No. 2 stand dispensed with.

3. Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking a direction to the Real Estate Regulatory Authority for taking necessary steps to ensure execution of order dated 22.3.2022 passed in Complaint No. LKO162/08/57523/2020, Anupma Sinha v. M/s. Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited. Further relief for issuance of Recovery Certificate under Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 read with Rule 23 of Rules, 2016 has also been sought.

4. Initially as noticed in order dated 22.3.2023, a preliminary objection has been raised with regard to maintainability of petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India that the Real Estate Regulatory Authority is neither a Court nor a Tribunal.

5. Learned counsel for petitioner in response to the preliminary objection has placed reliance on judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. and Others, 2021 (11) ADJ 280 (SC), as well as judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Pan Realtors Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. and Others passed in W.P. No. 27631 of 2021 to submit that the aforesaid authority has been held to be a quasi judicial authority by Hon'ble the Supreme Court and has been held to be covered under the connotation 'Tribunal' and as such petition would be maintainable.

6. With regard to aforesaid preliminary objection, it would be necessary to advert to whether the Real Estate Regulatory Authority can be construed to be either a Court or a Tribunal. The aspect of when an authority can be said to be a Court or a Tribunal has been discussed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Associated Cement Companies Ltd. v. P.N. Sharma and Another, AIR 1965 SC 1595:

“9. Tribunals which fall within the purview of Article 136(1) occupy a special position of their own under the scheme of our Constitution. Special matters and questions are entrusted to them for their decision and in that sense, they share with the Courts one common characteristic; both the Courts and the tribunals are “constituted by the State and are invested with judicial as distinguished from purely administrative or executive functions” [vide Durga Shankar Mehta v. Thakur Raghuraj Singh, (1955) 1 SCR 267 at p. 272]. They are both adjudicating bodies and they deal with and finally determine disputes between parties which are entrusted to their jurisdiction. The procedure followed by the Courts is regularly prescribed and in discharging their functions and exercising their powers, the Courts have to conform to that procedure. The procedure which the tribunals have to follow may not always be so strictly prescribed, but the approach adopted by both the Courts and the tribunals is substantially the same, and there is no essential difference between the functions that they discharge. As in the case of Courts, so in the case of tribunals, it is the State's inherent judicial power which has been transferred and by virtue of the said power, it is the State's inherent judicial function which they discharge. Judicial functions and judicial powers are one of the essential attributes of a sovereign State, and on considerations of policy, the State transfers its judicial functions and powers mainly to the Courts established by the Constitution; but that does not affect the competence of the State, by appropriate measures, to transfer a part of its judicial powers and functions to tribunals by entrusting to them the task of adjudicating upon special matters and disputes between parties. It is really not possible or even expedient to attempt to describe exhaustively the features which are common to the tribunals and the Cou