Jasvant S/O Babulal Kotecha vs Real Estate Regulatory Authority

Sangeeta K. Vishen, J

By this petition, the petitioners have prayed for direction to the respondent no.1 authority to hear and decide the complaint being CMP/Offline/Vadodara/200318/000035.

The grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition, is the inaction on the part of the respondent no.1 in not taking any decision on the complaint made by the petitioners under Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 2016'). Being aggrieved by the inaction, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition, seeking direction to the respondent no.1 to decide the complaint.

Mr. Chirag B. Upadhyay, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners has submitted that a complaint was filed on 17.3.2020, duly received by the respondent no.1 on 18.3.2020. However, till date, no decision has been taken. It is submitted that even the reminders were sent to the respondent no.1, however, of no avail.

It is submitted that in identical matter, the co-ordinate bench of this Court, has passed an order dated 12.1.2021 in Special Civil Application No.14645 of 2020, directing the authorities to decide the complaint in conformity with the provisions contained in Section 29 of the Act of 2016. It is urged that similar order be passed.

Considering the limited grievance raised by the petitioners, that is, the alleged inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not deciding the application/complaint dated 17.3.2020 of the petitioners, the ends of justice would meet if the respondent no.1 is directed to decide the application/complaint in accordance with law.

In view of the above, the respondent no.1, is directed to decide the application/complaint strictly in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible. The decision, be communicated to the petitioners within two weeks' from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Needless to say that the Court has not examined the merits of the case.

The petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Direct service is permitted.