RERA Appellate Order Passed Without Administrative Member Set Aside by Allahabad HC

Aadrikaa Legal Services (ALS)- Law I Litigation I Arbitration

Date: 03.10.2026

RERA Appellate Order Passed Without Administrative Member Set Aside by Allahabad HC

In an important ruling concerning the constitution and jurisdiction of the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has set aside an appellate judgment after finding that the order had not been passed by a Bench constituted in the manner prescribed under the Act.

Justice Pankaj Bhatia ruled in favour of Sudha Realtors Pvt. Ltd. on the jurisdictional issue arising from the absence of an Administrative Member from the Bench and remanded the matter to the appellate authority for a fresh decision.

The High Court relied upon its earlier decision in Shashank Gupta v. M/s Vatika Nirman Private Limited, 2025:AHC-LKO:48238, which had dealt with the issue of forum composition in the absence of an Administrative Member.

Delay in Filing RERA Appeal Condoned

• Before dealing with the substantive controversy, the High Court considered C.M. Application No. 1 of 2024 seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
• The Court found the cause shown to be sufficient, allowed the application and condoned the delay.
• The Court thereafter proceeded to examine the challenge to the appellate judgment dated 1 April 2024.

Dispute Over Section 43(5) Pre-Deposit

• The impugned judgment had recorded that there was non-compliance with Section 43(5) of the RERA Act, which contains the statutory pre-deposit requirement applicable to an appeal by a promoter.
• Against this background, the High Court framed substantial questions of law concerning both the constitution of the Appellate Tribunal Bench and the consequences of non-compliance with the statutory pre-deposit requirement.

The second question framed by the Court was particularly significant:

• Whether an appeal could be dismissed for non-compliance with Section 43(5), instead of first giving the appellant an opportunity to make the required deposit.
• However, the ultimate disposal turned on the first, jurisdictional issue concerning the composition of the Tribunal Bench.

Can a Chairman and Judicial Member Alone Constitute the RERA Appellate Bench?

• The first substantial question of law framed by the High Court was whether a judgment delivered by a forum comprising only a Chairman and Judicial Member could be treated as having been delivered by a validly constituted Bench under Section 43 of the RERA Act.
• This went to the very jurisdiction of the forum that had passed the impugned appellate judgment.
• The High Court found that the question concerning the absence of an Administrative Member had already been considered in Shashank Gupta v. M/s Vatika Nirman Private Limited.
• Applying that ruling, the Court concluded that the impugned order had not been passed by a Bench constituted as prescribed under Section 43(3) and was therefore without jurisdiction.

Absence of Administrative Member Makes Jurisdictional Difference

• The significance of the ruling lies in the distinction between an irregularity in procedure and a defect going to the jurisdiction of the adjudicatory forum itself.
• The High Court treated the absence of an Administrative Member as affecting the lawful constitution of the Bench under Section 43(3). Consequently, the appellate judgment could not be sustained merely because the matter had otherwise been adjudicated by the Chairman and Judicial Member.
• The jurisdictional issue was expressly decided in favour of Sudha Realtors Pvt. Ltd.

Earlier Writ Against Execution Proceedings

• During the proceedings, counsel for the respondents pointed out that the appellant had earlier approached the High Court by filing Writ-C No. 7828 of 2025 against execution proceedings.
• That writ petition had been dismissed, while leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum.
• The earlier writ proceedings, however, did not prevent the High Court from examining the jurisdictional validity of the RERA appellate order in the present statutory appeal.

Appellate Judgment Set Aside and Matter Remanded

• Having found that the impugned decision had not been rendered by a Bench constituted as contemplated under Section 43(3), the High Court set aside the appellate judgment dated 1 April 2024.
• The matter was then remanded to the appellate authority for fresh adjudication.
• Thus, the High Court did not finally determine the underlying merits of the real estate dispute between Sudha Realtors and the respondents. Instead, the earlier appellate adjudication was undone because of the jurisdictional defect, and the dispute was sent back for a fresh decision by the competent appellate forum.

Opportunity to Seek Interim Relief

• The High Court further clarified that it would be open to the appellant to approach the Appellate Tribunal, where the amount had been deposited and the matter had earlier been adjudicated.
• Sudha Realtors was also permitted to move an application seeking interim relief.
• Significantly, the High Court directed that if such an interim relief application was filed, it should be considered expeditiously, preferably within two weeks from the date of filing.

What About the Section 43(5) Pre-Deposit Question?

• The High Court had specifically framed the question whether an appeal could be dismissed for failure to comply with the Section 43(5) pre-deposit requirement without first giving the appellant an opportunity to make the deposit.
• However, the order ultimately disposed of the matter on the Bench-composition/jurisdiction issue by applying Shashank Gupta. The uploaded order does not contain a separate substantive determination of the second question concerning whether an opportunity to deposit must invariably be granted before dismissal.
• Accordingly, the judgment should not be read as laying down a final proposition that every RERA appeal deficient in Section 43(5) pre-deposit must necessarily be granted additional time. The operative relief flowed from the invalid constitution of the appellate Bench.

Key Legal Significance

• The decision has important implications for proceedings before RERA Appellate Tribunals.
• Where the statute prescribes the composition of an adjudicatory Bench, compliance with that requirement can go to the very jurisdiction of the forum. An appellate decision rendered by a Bench that does not satisfy the statutory composition requirement may therefore be vulnerable to challenge irrespective of the merits of the underlying dispute.
• The ruling also demonstrates that a party challenging an adverse RERA appellate order may raise a jurisdictional objection regarding Bench composition, distinct from questions concerning the correctness of the decision on merits or compliance with Section 43(5).
• At the same time, the order is procedurally limited: Sudha Realtors did not obtain a final determination of the underlying RERA dispute in its favour. It succeeded in having the earlier appellate judgment set aside, with the matter remanded for fresh consideration.

Case Referred

The principal precedent expressly relied upon by the High Court was:

• Shashank Gupta v. M/s Vatika Nirman Private Limited, 2025:AHC-LKO:48238 — relied upon on the issue of the constitution of the RERA appellate forum in the absence of an Administrative Member.

Conclusion

The Allahabad High Court’s decision underscores that statutory requirements governing the constitution of a RERA Appellate Tribunal are not merely procedural formalities.

Where an appellate order is passed by a Bench not constituted in the manner prescribed under Section 43(3), the resulting decision may be treated as being without jurisdiction.

In the present case, that defect resulted in the 1 April 2024 appellate judgment being set aside and the matter being remanded for fresh adjudication, while preserving Sudha Realtors’ right to seek interim relief before the appellate forum.

Aadrikaa Legal Services is a trusted legal and regulatory support partner providing end-to-end legal solutions to law firms, corporate organizations, and businesses across India. We specialize in paralegal services, litigation support, tax and regulatory matters, delivering reliable, efficient, and result-oriented legal assistance.

Our services include comprehensive paralegal support, drafting and documentation, legal research, case management, litigation handling, and representation support across various judicial and quasi-judicial forums. We also assist in direct and indirect tax matters, customs, GST, corporate regulatory compliance, and legal advisory.

Source: Allahabad High Court

Disclaimer

Handy Download:

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

Tel: +91-11-4999 2707

www.aadrikaalaw.com