1 / 7 2025:CGHC:44903 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3674 of 2025 1 - Bashir Mohammad S/o Late Shri Chedi Miyan Aged About 62 Years 2 - Vajir Mohammad S/o Late Shri Chedi Miyan Aged About 67 Years 3 - Kadir Mohammad S/o Late Shri Chedi Miyan Aged About 54 Years all Petitioners are R/o Adarsh Chowk, Mangla, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus 1 - The Chairman Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), Shastri Chowk, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Registrar Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (R E R A), Shastri Chowk, Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Prateek Singh Thakur, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Pranjal Agrawal, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 03/09/2025 1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. By way of the instant petition, the petitioners are praying for the following reliefs:- ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.11.19 17:48:07 +0530 2 / 7 10.1 That the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to call entire bank records required for adjudication of the instant case. 10.2 That the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to De- register petitioners RERA project named “Bashir Mohammad Vajir Mohammad Kadir Mohammad” bearing registration number as PCGRERA210119000894, and further set aside/quash order/letter dated 26/12/2024, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to not to compute litigation period starting from date of submission of de registration request till disposal of the writ petition, for imposition of any fines, penalties or any monetary obligations, in the interest of justice. 10.4 That any other relief which this Hon’ble court may deem fit and just may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in interest of justice. 3. The instant petition has been filed challenging the order dated 26/12/2024 passed by Respondent No.2 rejecting de-registration claim of the petitioners of RERA Project named “Bashir Mohammad Vajir Mohammad Kadir Mohammad”. 4. The brief facts of the case as projected by the petitioners are that the petitioners are the promoters of the RERA Project named "Bashir Mohammad Vajir Mohammad Kadir Mohammad". The petitioners are the owners of land situated at Mangla, District Bilaspur bearing khasra no. 249/1,249/2,228,230 and 225/2 admeasuring around 5.34 acres and the said land is registered for the aforementioned RERA project. The petitioners applied for registration of the said RERA project in year 2017 successfully registered the RERA project with registration number being PCGRERA210119000894 following due 3 / 7 procedure and the petitioners initiated their RERA project under Plotted Development Scheme and tried to sell the plots. The said RERA project was not doing well and the petitioner soon realised it is failure. The petitioners applied for De- Registration of the said RERA project before the respondent authorities. The respondent no.2 directed the petitioner to follow the due procedure for de- registration of RERA project. The petitioners performed all the procedure by publication of de registration notice and paid the financial dues as directed by the respondent. Later the de-registration request of the petitioner was rejected by the respondent no.2 vide letter dated 26/12/2024 on account of pending litigation. The petitioners are being made liable to pay the financial costs of the project as per the RERA act 2016 and Chhattisgarh Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 despite of the fact that the petitioner are not in financial condition to continue the RERA project or pay any kind of financial amount under the 2016 Act and 2017 Rules which are required to be paid by Promoters on monthly basis. The RERA Appellate Authority has passed the order in favour of petitioner which is under challenge before this Court. The petitioners are willing to abide by the finality of pending litigation therefore seeks de registration of RERA project with condition to abide by the finality of pending litigation. Hence this petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the de- registration procedure set out by the respondent authority vide order dated 21/09/2022 does not specify the cancellation of de-registration 4 / 7 request on ground of pending litigation. He would next contend that there is no provision in the Real Estate (regulation and Development) Act 2016 and Chhattisgarh Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 for de-registration of RERA project. He would next contend that the only legal procedure set out for de- registration is passed by RERA authority vide order dated 21/09/2022 and the same does not provide pending litigation a ground for rejection. He would next contend that the petitioners are having poor financial condition and have suffered a huge loss in the said RERA project due to which many disputes are arising between the promoters. The RERA authority without considering the financial conditions of the petitioners are keeping alive the registration status of the RERA project due to which the petitioners have to pay the penalties, fines etc due to non-compliance of liabilities and obligations set out in the RERA act 2016 and 2017 Rules. Once the promoters have willing expressed for de registration stating incapacity to comply with the monetary liabilities and obligation, no authority should compel them to continue their registration of the said project and further imposed more monetary liability on them. The respondent authority is taking advantage of silent laws in doing so which is arbitrary. He would next contend that the RERA Appellate Authority vide order dated 22/04/2024 has set aside the order dated 29/02/2021 under which the petitioners were liable to pay the Rs 33,00,000/- and interest amount of Rs 5,81,900/- and this Court has also not passed any interim relief 5 / 7 regarding payment of any amount in Misc Appeal no. 53/2024. Since there is no operative order directing the petitioners to pay any amount the de-registration of the RERA project should not be rejected by the respondent authorities. He would next contend that the the registration time period for petitioners RERA project has been expired and the same has not been renewed considering the pendency of de-registration claim. He would next contend that no real estate business has been done by the petitioners after expiry of registration time period not any action has been taken by respondent authority under Section 7 of RERA act 2016. The respondent authority has the power to revoke the registration of RERA project for any default action done violating any provision of the 2016 act. He would next contend that when the laws are silent for the re- registration of RERA project, the executive directions cannot be arbitrary. The direction issued by the respondent authorities dated 21/09/2022 does not create a mandatory provision for promoters to apply for de-registration pending litigation, specially when the operative order is in favour of the promoter and alternate remedies lies for the opposite party to achieve their desired claim. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents /RERA contended that if appeal is still pending before the High Court and the petitioner has submitted an affidavit before the RERA vide Annexure P/5 wherein at para 2 it has been categorically stated that “we have returned the booking amount of any person/institution as per the terms and conditions of the booking. Now we do not have any 6 / 7 pending payment of any person/institution regarding this project”, however, the appeal is pending against the petitioner. He would further contend that the contents of the aforesaid para 2 of the affidavit are not correct as the respondent authorities after knowing that the petitioner after the de-registration shall lose the title of the promoter and the same shall affect the ongoing pending litigation, therefore, in the interest of justice the communication dated 26/12/2024 was passed by the answering respondent as there is an ongoing litigation, the de-registration shall not be done and after the disposal of the aforesaid case, the process of the de-registration shall be done in accordance with law. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case; grievance raised by the petitioner; and also considering the fact that no interim stay has been granted by this Court against the petitioner, it is directed that in the event the petitioner furnishes security, bank guarantee or solvency certificate to the satisfaction of the RERA for an amount of Rs.33,00,000/- and interest of Rs.5,81,900/- total 38,81,900/- before the RERA then the process of de-registration shall be carried out accordingly subject to payment of all the penalties /dues by the petitioner and subject to verification or the petitioner can file an appeal against the order dated 26/12/2024 (Annexure P/1), if so desire. 7 / 7 9. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu