logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2025 APHC 1746 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : Writ Petition Nos. 8891 & 2023 & 10644 Of 2024
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
Parties : Chetti Satya Venkata Jagan Kumar Raja Versus The State Of AP, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary To Government, Municipal Administration And Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: A.K. Kishore Reddy, Advocate. For the Respondents: GP For Muncipal Admn Urban Dev, V.V. Ravi Prasad, Advocate, K, Sreenivasulu Reddy, SC For Urban Development Authorities.
Date of Judgment : 01-12-2025
Head Note :-
Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - Sub-section (2) of Section 44 -
Judgment :-

Oral Common Order:

1. Heard Sri A.K. Kishore Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Sri M. Srinu Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for MAUD and Ms. Aruna, learned Counsel representing Sri V.V. Ravi Prasad, learned Counsel for the Unofficial Respondents.

2. In Writ Petition No.8891 of 2023, the Impugned Order was passed on 06.05.2022 (as per the Certified Copy of the Order passed by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Vijayawada in C.P.No.20 of 2021). After Petitioner having come to know about the fact that an Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, the Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition on 11.04.2023.

3. In Writ Petition No.10644 of 2024, the Impugned Order was passed on 28.08.2023, and the Petitioner, after having come to know that the Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, has filed the present Writ Petition on 30.04.2024, and since that date, the said Writ Petition has been pending on the file of this Court.

4. Learned Counsel for the Respondents has raised a preliminary objection on the ground of limitation under proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 44 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Admittedly, the Appellate Tribunal was neither functioning nor was accepting filing of Appeals, which compelled several of the aggrieved parties to approach this Court by filing Writ Petitions by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

5. As per the information furnished by Sri M. Srinu Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for MAUD, the Registrar of the Appellate Forum was appointed on 06.06.2025.

6. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the time taken in approaching this Court by filing the present Writ Petitions was on account of the confusion that prevailed during the relevant period, and the Petitioner was engaged in obtaining legal opinion in view of the fact that the Appellate Tribunal was not functioning as on the date when the Impugned Orders were passed.

7. Since the Appellate Tribunal has now been constituted and is now functioning, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of these Writ Petitions by giving liberty to the Petitioner herein to initiate Proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal.

8. In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner explaining the reasons for approaching this Court, the Court is of the opinion that the reasons stated by the Petitioner are justified. Therefore, the Petitioner is directed to file Statutory Appeals under Section 44 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, within a period of two weeks from today.

9. If the Petitioner files the Statutory Appeals within the time granted by this Court, there shall be a direction to the Appellate Forum not to insist on the limitation aspect.

10. With these observations and directions, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs.

11. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order.
 
  CDJLawJournal