p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MSA No.11 of 2025 Rajadhani Systems and Estates Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar …. Appellant Mr. D.P. Nanda, Senior Advocate -Versus- Odisha Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Bhubaneswar & another …. Respondents Mr. M. Agarwal, Advocate (Respondent No.2) CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 27.03.2025 01. 1. A memo of appearance is filed on behalf of Mr. Nanda, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant, which is accepted and taken on record. 2. Heard Mr. Nanda, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant and Mr. Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 3. Notice vis-à-vis respondent No.1 is dispensed with since the matter is disposed of at the stage of admission. 4. Instant appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the impugned order dated 18th June, 2024 passed in connection with Complaint Case No.428 of 2024 confirmed in OREAT Appeal No.106 of 2024 by learned Odisha Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Bhubaneswar on the grounds stated therein. 5. Mr. Nanda, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the order of status quo by learned Odisha p. 2 Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Bhubaneswar in C.C. No.428 of 2024 has been made absolute vide Annexure-8 and the same is confirmed in OREAT Appeal No.106 of 2024 as per Annexure-1. The submission is that the authority below could not have directed not to cancel the allotment in respect of the flat in question. It is submitted that the cancellation of the allotment was on account of non-payment of dues and it was in terms of the agreement between the parties. 6. Mr. Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that even though such is the order vide Annexure-8 not to cancel the allotment but the question vis-à-vis the dispute inter se is required to be gone into in the complaint proceeding. The further submission is that peremptory direction may perhaps be issued to the Odisha Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Bhubaneswar for early disposal of Complaint Case No.428 of 2024, inasmuch as, no substantial question of law is involved in the appeal. The impugned order under Annexure-8 followed by Annexure-1 is sought to be questioned by Mr. Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent No.2 referring to Section 11(5) of the RERA Act. 7. Recording such submissions of Mr. Nanda, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent No.2, the Court is of the view that the question with regard to cancellation of allotment is a matter to be examined and can be a subject of adjudication at the time of disposal of Complaint Case No.428 of 2024 while maintaining the order of status quo which has been made absolute. The Court is also of the view that a time line should be fixed for learned ORERA to ensure disposal of the complaint in the interest of the parties. 8. Accordingly, it is ordered. p. 3 9. In the result, the appeal stands disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to take up immediate hearing and disposal of Complaint Case No.428 of 2024 preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 10. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules. Alok (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge