Allowed

Dhirendra Kumar Bhandari v. Presiding Officer, U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal,Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Oct 2025RERA/73/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that an order passed by the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal without a technical member was null and void under Section 43(3) of the RERA Act. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for a fresh decision.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 12.06.2024 was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the Appellate Tribunal to pass a fresh order.

Dhirendra Kumar Bhandari Vs Presiding Officer… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

RERA APPEAL No. - 73 of 2024

¶3

Dhirendra Kumar Bhandari

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

U. P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Azhar Ikram, Manish Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, Gautam Johri

¶9

Court No. - 20

¶10

HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J.

¶11

Heard Sri Azhar Ikram, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Saurav Mishra, Advocate, holding on behalf of Sri Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent/ U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad.

¶12

By means of the present petition, the appellant has assailed the order dated 12.06.2024 passed by the learned U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow in Appeal No. 54 of 2024 (U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. Real Estate Regulatory Authority And Others).

¶13

The present appeal was admitted and the following substantial questions of law were framed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.08.2024.

¶14

"(i) Whether as per the law laid down by this Court in RERA Appeal No. 67 of 2023, the adjudicating officer had rightly entertained the claim of the petitioner for payment of interest as compensation?

¶15

(ii) When Section 43(3) of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 specifically provides that every bench of appellate tribunal shall consist at least one technical member, whether a final judgment and order passed by a Bench in which no administrative or technical member was there, will be sustainable in law? "

¶16

It is noteworthy that the question No. 2 framed in the case of Shashank Gupta (supra) , is identical to the question involved in the present appeal and the said question has been answered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as follows:

¶17

"24. Thus, on a conjoint reading of the said three provisions, I do not have any hesitation in holding that the order passed by

¶18

RERA No. 73 of 2024

¶19

¶20

the Appellate Tribunal, which is not in consonance with the manner of constitution of Benches as prescribed under Section 43(3) of the Act is null and void and would not stand cured by invoking Section 55 of the Act.

¶21

25. In view of the said findings, the order impugned is clearly beyond the jurisdiction and cannot be sustained on that ground. "

¶22

Learned counsel for the appellant has also relied upon the judgment passed by this Court in RERA Appeal No. 34/24 (Real Estate Industrial Development Authority, Unnao thorugh Project Officer Versus Ravi Sharma) wherein the Court while allowing the appeals therein, held as under:

¶23

"2. The said appeals were admitted by means of the order dated 01.11.2024 and similar orders passed on different dates, wherein two questions were framed. However, at the time of the hearing, the third question with regard to the jurisdiction arises. As such, an additional substantial question of law to the following effect is framed.

¶24

3. Whether, the order passed by a Bench comprising of the Chairman and a Judicial Member, would be a proper Tribunal in terms of the prescriptions contained in Section 43(3) of the RERA Act, 2016 read with Rules framed thereunder?

¶25

4. The issue with regard to the jurisdiction involved in the present appeals has already been considered by this Court in the of Shashank Gupta Vs. M/s Vatika Nirman Private Limited, Lucknow (RERA Appeal No.8 of 2024) Neutral Citation No.2025: AHC-LKO:48238.

¶26

5. Following the said judgement, the orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal and impugned in the present appeals is held to be null and void and is, accordingly, set aside.

¶27

6. The matter is remanded to the Appellate Tribunal to pass fresh order, in accordance with law.

¶28

7. The appeals are allowed."

¶29

In view of the above, this Court finds that the impugned order 12.06.2024 passed by the learned U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow in Appeal No. 54 of 2024 (U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. Real Estate Regulatory Authority And Others) is clearly beyond the jurisdiction and cannot be sustained on that ground.

¶30

Therefore, without adverting on the other grounds as raised by the

¶31

RERA No. 73 of 2024

¶32

¶33

learned counsel for the appellant, the matter is remanded to the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow to consider and decide the appeal afresh, expeditiously, in the light of the law as discussed here-in-above and the observations made herein.

¶34

The present appeal is accordingly allowed .

¶35

(Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.)

¶36

October 15, 2025 (Manoj K.)

¶37

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dhirendra Kumar Bhandari v. Presiding Officer, U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal,Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhirendra Kumar Bhandari v. Presiding Officer, U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal,Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt.Raghurai Vs Ram Shanker and Another

Smt. Zainab Vs Rahmat Ali

Smt. Laung Sree Vs Kaulay Ram and Others

Kunwar Shakti Singh Vs Kunwar Bahadur Singh and Others

Mrs. Sangeeta Kumar and Another Vs Laureate Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Thru Its Director and Another

Shailesh Awasthi Thru. Power of Attorney Holder Sri Brijendra Kumar Sharma Vs U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow