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

The post Policy or Regulatory Decisions Under RERA Must Be Taken by the Authority as a Whole, Not by One Member Sitting Alone appeared first on Square Feat India.

By Varun Singh

RERA in India has had its presence for 4 years now, and in this period a total of 63,583 projects have been registered across the country.

According to data collated by ANAROCK Property Consultants, as many as 65,539 cases have been disposed of by the respective state authorities as of 24 April 2021, according to data by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs.

Out of this, nearly 40% cases (approx. 26,510 complaints) were resolved in Uttar Pradesh (UP RERA) alone, followed by Haryana with 13,269 cases and Maharashtra with 9,265 cases.

The three states cumulatively accounted for nearly 75% of the total disposed cases under RERA in the country.

Project and real estate agent registrations under RERA have also been growing steadily.

As of 24 April 2021, nearly 63,583 projects and 50,256 real estate agents have been registered under RERA across the country. Back in the corresponding period in 2019, about 40,155 projects and 29,208 real estate agents were registered.

This amounts to an increase of 58% and 72% respectively over the last two years.

Anuj Puri, Chairman – ANAROCK Property Consultants says, “One of RERA’s primary purposes is to address real estate consumers’ grievances. As such, the fact that the RERA authorities of various states and UTs have resolved over 65,539 consumer complaints in the last four years is noteworthy.”

“Uttar Pradesh (UP RERA) has resolved the highest number of cases, which is again notable considering how severely Noida and Greater Noida in UP had been impacted by shady dealings of unscrupulous players,” says Puri.

Maharashtra remains the frontrunner for project registrations – of all projects registered under RERA to date across 34 states/UTs, Maharashtra accounts for a 45% share.

Gujarat comes next with a 13% share, followed by Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka with about 6% share each, and Uttar Pradesh with a 5% share.

Four years after its implementation, RERA is coming closer to being the force it was envisioned to be – especially in disposing of consumer complaints across different states and UTs.

Rohit Poddar, Managing Director, Poddar Housing and Development Ltd & Joint Secretary, NAREDCO Maharashtra, says, “RERA has acted as a catalyst in remodeling the functionality of the real estate industry. One of RERA’s key attributes has been in developing reforms bringing meaningful interventions aimed at standardizing the codes of business and providing a complaint redressal platform for home buyers. The introduction of new reforms to protect homebuyers’ investments in the event of developer fraud has strengthened the home buyer’s confidence in the sector even further. RERA has effectively reduced builder and home buyer disputes over the last five years, and with digital advancement, RERA has simplified the due diligence process for homebuyers, making their home buying experience more seamless.”

Progress of RERA across India

• So far, 34 States/UTs have notified rules under RERA. The North Eastern State of Nagaland is still under process to notify its rules while West Bengal enacted its own legislation that was challenged by the MoHUA before the Supreme Court. However, in a major development, the apex court very recently struck down West Bengal Housing Industry Regulation Act, 2017 (WBHIRA) stating that it overlaps with RERA that was enacted a law in the Parliament.
• 30 States/UTs have already set up a Real Estate Regulatory Authority since implementation, and of this at least 5 are interim. Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, Meghalaya and Sikkim have also notified their RERA rules but are yet to establish Authorities.
• 28 States/UTs have set up Real Estate Appellate Tribunal for disposing of consumer complaints, including 6 as interim. Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Sikkim are still underway to establish theirs.
• Regulatory authorities of 27 States/UTs have operationalized their websites under RERA provisions. Arunachal Pradesh, Assam and Manipur are under process to operationalize.

Also Read: UP RERA disposed 18k complaints, Maha 7.8k in 3 yrs

The post UP RERA Disposed Most Cases, MahaRERA Is Third appeared first on Square Feat India.