Shankar Shahi vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 11227 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 47
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1165 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Shankar Shahi
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- V.R. Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ankit Prakash,Mohd. Afzal
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

This writ petition is directed against an order passed by the Executive Officer, RERA, dated 21.12.2022 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition), whereby the application filed by the petitioner complainant has been consigned to records, in view of the pendency of matter before the NCLT. The order impugned further records that despite sufficient opportunity given, the petitioner has not come forward to argue the matter before the RERA.

The order is assailed on the ground that proper notice was not given to the petitioner and links were not provided, on account of which petitioner was prevented from highlighting its case before the competent authority. A Division Bench judgment of this Court in Shankar Shahi Vs. State of U.P. and others, passed in Writ-C No.4138 of 2022, is otherwise relied upon, in order to contend that the RERA being a quasi-judicial authority has the inherent jurisdiction to entertain the application for procedural review, particularly as the order has been passed without giving appropriate opportunity of hearing. The Division Bench for such purposes has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kapra Mazdoor Ekta Union Vs. Management of M/s Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. and others, reported in 2005 (13) SCC 777.

Learned counsel for the respondent RERA, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner has not argued its complaint on the date fixed, and therefore no interference is called for in the matter. It is further submitted that the issue is otherwise engaging attention of NCLT and it would be open for the petitioner to raise a claim after the pending matter before the NCLT attains finality.

In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon an order passed by the NCLT on 19.12.2022 in order to submit that the proceedings before the NCLT have concluded.

Be that as it may, we find that the order impugned has been passed without hearing the petitioner. In the facts of the case, we are thus of the view that the petitioner be permitted to move an application for recall of the order dated 21.12.2022 within two weeks from today. In case such an application is filed, the same shall be entertained without any objection with regard to limitation and an appropriate decision would be taken in the matter.

Writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of.

We, moreover, make it clear that we have not adjudicated any of the contentious issues including the question as to whether the dispute with regard to matter in issue is pending adjudication before the NCLT or not, and all such issues are left open to be decided by the competent authority, at the first instance.

Order Date :- 17.4.2023

Anil