Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Panchmal Properties, a proprietorship concern represented by its proprietrix Ms. Preeti Shenoy, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2, the State of Karnataka, to establish a Real Estate Regulatory Authority and a Real Estate Appellate Tribunal as provided under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA). The petitioner also sought other consequential reliefs. The respondents included the Union of India, the State of Karnataka, and the Interim Real Estate Regulatory Authority. The court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sanjay Krishna V., the learned Additional Advocate General Mr. Sandesh J. Chouta along with Mr. B. Balakrishna for respondent No.2, Mr. K. Manjunatha Rao Bhonsle for respondent No.1, and Mr. Prashanth M.V. for respondent No.3. The court observed that the RERA Act came into force on May 1, 2016, and under Section 20(1) of the Act, the State Government was required to establish a Real Estate Regulatory Authority within one year from the date of commencement of the Act. Similarly, under Section 43(5) of the Act, the State Government was required to establish a Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. The court noted that despite the lapse of more than three years, the State of Karnataka had not established the Authority or the Tribunal. The court held that the State has a statutory duty to establish these bodies and the failure to do so amounts to a dereliction of duty. Accordingly, the court allowed the writ petition and directed the State of Karnataka to establish the Real Estate Regulatory Authority and the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal within three months from the date of the order. The court also directed that the petition be disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Statutory Duty - The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the State of Karnataka to establish a Real Estate Regulatory Authority and a Real Estate Appellate Tribunal under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The court held that the State has a statutory duty under Section 20(1) and Section 43(5) of the Act to establish the Authority and Tribunal, and failure to do so warrants issuance of mandamus. (Paras 1-4) B) Real Estate Law - Establishment of Regulatory Authority - Section 20(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - The court noted that the Act came into force on May 1, 2016, and the State was required to establish the Authority within one year. Since the Authority was not established, the court directed the State to do so within three months. (Paras 2-4) C) Real Estate Law - Establishment of Appellate Tribunal - Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - The court also directed the State to establish the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal within three months, as required under the Act. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State of Karnataka is obligated to establish a Real Estate Regulatory Authority and a Real Estate Appellate Tribunal under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel such establishment.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The State of Karnataka is directed to establish the Real Estate Regulatory Authority and the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal within three months from the date of the order. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Mandamus
- Statutory Duty
- Establishment of Regulatory Authority
- Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act
- 2016
- Section 20(1)
- Section 43(5)
- Constitutional Duty
- Articles 226 and 227
