In a landmark ruling that could reshape how Real Estate Regulatory Authorities (RERAs) across India function, the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (HREAT) has held that no RERA Chairman can pass an order alone in matters requiring collective decision-making.
The Tribunal ruled that policy and quasi-judicial decisions must be taken by the Authority as a whole body with proper quorum, setting a crucial precedent for RERA institutions nationwide.
Background: What Triggered the Case
The case arose from a challenge filed by Inspire Parking Nest Pvt. Ltd., whose project registration application had been rejected by the Haryana RERA, Gurugram on June 30, 2025.
The rejection order was passed solely by the RERA Chairman, as one Member of the Authority was on sanctioned leave and another had expressed temporary inability to participate in the proceedings.
The developer argued that the order was passed without quorum, violating the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA Act), which requires that such matters be decided by the Authority collectively.
The Tribunal’s Ruling: Quorum Is Not Optional
A two-member bench of the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal — Justice Rajan Gupta (Chairman) and Rakesh Manocha (Technical Member) — agreed with the developer’s contention, setting aside the RERA Chairman’s decision.
The Tribunal ruled that Section 29 of the RERA Act mandates that all meetings of the Authority — especially those involving regulatory or policy decisions — must be conducted with the prescribed quorum.
It emphasized that the absence of quorum renders any decision “unsustainable in law.”
The bench observed:
“Policy or regulatory decisions under RERA are to be taken by the Authority as a whole body, not by one member sitting alone.”
Supreme Court Precedent Reinforced
The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court’s 2022 judgment in Newtech Promoters & Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of UP, which clarified that:
- RERA’s policy and regulatory decisions must be made collectively by the Authority; and
- Such business cannot be delegated to a single member under any provision of the Act.
Citing this precedent, the Tribunal stated that quasi-judicial powers under Section 34(a) — such as registration decisions, penalties, and compliance orders — cannot be exercised unilaterally by one member.
Chairman’s Solo Order “Post-Haste” and Unsustainable
The Tribunal took note that the Chairman himself had sanctioned the leave of one Member and was aware of the other’s temporary inability to attend.
Despite this, the order was issued hastily on June 30, 2025.
The Tribunal observed:
“The meeting could have been conveniently postponed to enable both Members to participate. The haste in deciding the matter has caused prejudice to the appellant.”
It concluded that the Chairman’s unilateral order lacked jurisdiction and violated the principle of fair hearing.
Matter Sent Back for Fresh Decision
Setting aside the June 30 order, the Tribunal remitted the case back to Haryana RERA with directions to:
- Reconsider the project registration application with proper quorum;
- Examine all reports and legal opinions on record; and
- Deliver a fresh, reasoned order within six weeks.
Why This Matters for RERA Bodies Nationwide
This ruling could have nationwide implications for the functioning of RERA authorities:
- It reinforces that collective decision-making is mandatory, not procedural formality.
- It ensures transparency and fairness in RERA’s quasi-judicial and policy actions.
- It provides a benchmark precedent for developers and homebuyers challenging unilateral or non-quorum orders across states.
Legal experts say this is a reminder that RERA’s credibility depends on adherence to due process, especially when its decisions affect thousands of crores worth of real estate development and homebuyer rights.
Key Takeaways:
- ⚖️ Single-member RERA orders lack jurisdiction when quorum is not met.
- 🏛️ All policy or quasi-judicial RERA decisions must be collective.
- 🕒 Expeditious disposal cannot override statutory procedure.
- 📜 Supreme Court’s Newtech Promoters ruling reaffirmed.
Also Read: In a landmark decision: MahaRERA Tribunal Upholds RERA Act’s Retroactive Power
