[2026:RJ-JP:7044] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8225/2024 B.D.I. Residents Welfare Society, B.D.I. Sunshine City, Alwar Bye Pass Road, Bhiwadi, Khairthal Tijara (Rajasthan) Through President. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Berry Developers And Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Corporate Office Building No.80, 3Rd Floor, Sector-44, Near Ramada Hotel, Gurugram (Haryana)-122002, Registered Office-C- 47, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi-110028. 2. B.d.i. Estates Pvt. Ltd, Alwar Bye-Pass Road, Bhiwadi, Khairthal Tijara (Rajasthan), Registered Office-C-47, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi-110028. 3. Bhiwadi Integrated Development Authority, Bhiwadi (Khairthal Tijara) Through Chief Executive Officer, Tehsil Tapukada, District Khairthal Tijara (Rajasthan). 4. 4. Competent Authority - Cum - Officer, Bhiwadi Integrated Development Authority, Bhiwadi (Khairthal Tijara). 5. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Urban Development And Housing Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Mehta, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Yashodhar Pandey For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak with Ms. Jaya Pathak Mr. Umesh Nagpal Mr. R.K. Tongawat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 12/02/2026 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the following prayers :- [2026:RJ-JP:7044] (2 of 5) [CW-8225/2024] "(i) issue appropriate writ, order and direction, in the nature thereof, whereby the respondents No.1 and 2 be directed to comply with the provisions of the Act of 2015, Rules made thereunder and Model Bye- Laws, 2020 and handover management of the society to the petitioner alongwith all common areas, facilities, assets, documents, accounts etc; (ii) issue appropriate writ, order and direction, in the nature thereof, whereby the respondents No.1 and 2 be palalized for violations of the Act of 2015 and Rules made thereunder on account of failure of respondents No.3 and 4 to panalize respondents No.1 and 2; (iii) issue appropriate writ, order and direction, in the nature thereof, whereby the respondents No.1 and 2 be directed to cease and desist the operation of illegal hotel over the club house and part and common areas of the petitioner and to handover the Club House and park to the petitioner, further respondent No.3 and 4 be directed to ensure the proper and complete handover; (iv) issue appropriate writ, order and direction, in the nature thereof, to reprimand respondents No.3 and 4 in their failure to take action against respondent No.1 and 2; (v) issue appropriate writ, order and direction, in the nature thereof, whereby the impugned order dated 20.03.2024 passed by the Competent Authority-cum- Officer, BIDA Bhiwadi (Khairthal-Tijara), Alwar in Case No.01/2024 titled as 'President, B.D.I. SUNSHINE CITY SOCIETY Vs. BERRY Developers And Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.' may kindly be quashed and set aside; (vi) issue appropriate writ, order and direction, in the nature thereof, whereby exemplary cost be imposed on respondents No.1 and 2 for willful disobedience and violation of the Act of 2015, Rules made thereunder and Model Bye-Laws, 2020; (vii) issue appropriate writ, order and direction, in the nature thereof, whereby direct respondents No.1 and 2 to pay mesne profit to the tune of Rs.30 Lacs a month to the petitioner from the date of complaint made in the year 2015 for infringing on the rights of the petitioner and the residents / apartment owners [2026:RJ-JP:7044] (3 of 5) [CW-8225/2024] by establishing and operating illegal hotel on the club house and park; (viii) issue appropriate writ, order and direction, in the nature thereof, whereby the respondent No.5 be directed to issue standing orders/directions to the respondents No.3 and 4 to ensure compliance of the provisions of the Act of 2015, Rules made thereunder and Model Bye-Laws, 2020; (ix) Any other relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper be also granted in favour of the Petitioner; (x) Cost of the present proceedings may also be awarded in favour of the humber Petitioner." 2. The factual background of the case is that the petitioner has moved an application to the Competent Authority under the provisions of the Rajasthan Apartment Ownership Act, 2015 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act of 2015") by submitting the complaint in a prescribed form-B. 3. The Competent Authority, BIDA, Bhiwadi vide its order dated 20.07.2022 decided the application with the directions as under:- " इसस कम मम आर.डबलल. एस कक ननररनशत नकयय जयतय हह नक सकसययटस ननवयससययन ममटटनमस कक बकययय रयनश कक जमय करवययट जयनट कट पशचयत भस यनर समबबनधत मटनटसनटनस एजमसस कक सटवयओब सट सबतलष नहस हकतट हह तक रयजसथयन अपयटरममट सवयनमतव अनधननयम ममडल बयई- लकज 2020 कट एनटकचर (ए) कट अनलसयर (ई.जस.बस.एम) आयकनजत कर मटनटसनटनस एजमसस कक बरलनट कय पसतयव पयररत कर उक मटनटसनटनस एजमसस कक बरल सकतट हह।" 4. Against the order dated 20.07.2022, none of the parties have preferred an appeal as provided under Section 26 of the Act of 2015 and therefore, the said order became final. However, the respondents herein, preferred a review petition after more than a period of about two years. 5. In the meantime, the petitioner preferred an Execution Application before the Competent Authority for execution of the [2026:RJ-JP:7044] (4 of 5) [CW-8225/2024] directions given in the order dated 20.07.2022 and the Competent Authority vide its order dated 20.02.2024 ordered as under:- " पतयवलस मम पसतलत सबलग रसतयवटज अनलसयर बस.डस. आई रटनजडमस वटलफह यर सकसययटस कय रनजसटटटशन रयजसथयन सकसययटस रनजसटटसकरण अनधननधम 1958 कक धयरय 4(1) कट अनतररत नरनयबक 24/01/2023 कक नकयय रयय हह। रयजसथयन अपयटरममट ऑनरनशप एकट 2015 कट अधययय 6 कक धयरय 19 कट अनतररत सबरत कट बनययट जयनट कट तसन मयस कट भसतर और नकसस सबरम कट इस अनधननयम कट अधसन रनजसटटसशन समझट जयनट कट मयमलट मम उक अनधननयम कट पयरमभ कट तसन मयस कट भसतर- भसतर सबरम कय अनतररत करटरय। अतत अपयथर कक अपयटरममट ऑनरनशप एकट धयरय 24 (9) धयरय 25 (ख) मम परत शनकयय कट अनलशरण मम ननररनशत नकयय जयतय हह, धयरय 10 (2) एवब 19 मम नवननरत रसतयवटज एव समसत शनकययय तलरनत पभयव सट नक बस. डस आई रटनजडमस वटलफह यर सकसययटस ( आर डबलल ए) कक आरटश जयरस हकनट कट 15 नरवस मम सलपलरर करम।" 6. The Competent Authority 20.03.2024 while deciding the review petition filed by the respondents herein against the order dated 20.07.2022, passed the order as under:- " उभय पक कक बहस कक सलननट, जयत एवब परत नवनध कट अधययन कट पशचयत सपष हह नक रयजसथयन अपयटरममट आननरनशप एकट 2015 कट तहत कयययरलय सकम अनधकयरस बसडय, दयरय नरनयबक 20/07/2022 कक आरटश पयररत नकयय रयय थय, पतयवलस पर ममजजर तथयय कट अनलसयर इस आरटश कक अपसल आनरनयबक तक नहह कक रई हह। उक आरटश कट ननषपयरन हटतल अपयथर दयरय इजरयय पयथरनय पत पटश नकयय रयय, नजसकट कम मम नरनयक 20/02/2024 कक आरटश पयररत नकयय रयय। इजरयय पयथरनय पत मम जयरस आरटश नरनयबक 20/07/2022 कक पयररत मजल आरटश सट सबरत पतसत नहस हकतय हह। अतत रकनक पकय कक पयबबर नकयय जयतय हह नक यनर नकसस नययययलय कय सथरन आनर नय हकनट कक नसथनत मम रकनय पक नरनयबक 20/07/2022 कक सकम पयनधकयरस बसडय दयरय परत आरटशय कक पयलनय सलनननशचत करट। पतयवलस फह सल शलमयर हककर नमबर सट कम हक।" 7. In the operative part of the order dated 20.03.2024, Competent Authority has observed that the order passed in the Execution Application is not in consonance with the order dated 20.07.2022 which is passed on a complaint submitted by the petitioner. [2026:RJ-JP:7044] (5 of 5) [CW-8225/2024] 8. After going through the orders as referred above, the Court finds that when there was no challenge to the order passed by the Competent Authority on the Execution Application, there was no occasion for the authority which has passed the order dated 20.03.2024 to make any comment on the order of Execution Application. 9. In opinion of this Court, the observations made vide order dated 20.03.2024 as regards the order dated 20.02.2024 is in excess of jurisdiction and therefore, the same is not sustainable. 10. In view of the discussions made above, this Court is of the opinion that the order dated 20.03.2024 deserves to be quashed and set aside. 11. Accordingly, the present writ petition is partly allowed and the order dated 20.03.2024, is hereby, quashed and set aside. 12. It is made clear that both the parties are at liberty to avail an appropriate remedy available to them under law as regards any grievance including the order passed by any authority and the petitioner would also be at liberty to make a fresh application/complaint, if any, grievance was not raised or addressed in the earlier complaint. 13. In view of the order passed in the main petition, the stay application as well as pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /167