Patna High Court
Sudarshan SinhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court set aside the order dated 15 May 2025 and restored the execution proceeding, thereby disposing of the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Sudarshan Sinha, filed a writ petition challenging two orders dated 15 May 2025 and 2 September 2025 issued by the Chairman of the Bihar Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) that allegedly misrepresented the refund of Rs.12 lakh, stating that the full amount had been returned when only Rs.6 lakh was actually refunded. The petitioner sought certiorari to quash those orders and mandamus directing the respondent bank to refund the remaining Rs.6 lakh with compound interest and compensation for mental harassment. The petitioner also relied on an earlier RERA order dated 24 July 2024 that directed a full refund with interest, which had not been complied with. The court observed that the execution proceeding had been improperly dropped based on inaccurate submissions and that the compliance of the 24 July 2024 order remained outstanding. Consequently, the court set aside the 15 May 2025 order, restored the execution proceeding to its original file, and directed RERA to issue appropriate notices and enforce the 24 July 2024 order. The writ petition was therefore disposed of.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy for the alleged non‑compliance with the RERA order directing refund of Rs.12 lakh?
- Whether the orders dated 15 May 2025 and 2 September 2025 passed by the Chairman of RERA Bihar should be quashed?
- Whether mandamus can be issued directing the respondent bank to refund the remaining amount with interest and compensation?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- RERA
- certiorari
- mandamus
- refund
- execution proceeding
- interest
- compensation
- real estate
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20057 of 2025
======================================================
Sudarshan Sinha Son of Shree Shivjee Prasad, Resident of T-6 B, Railway
Colony, Near Railway Station, Nabha, Patiala, P.S.- Nabha, District- Patiala,
Punjab-147201.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. Real State Regulatory Authority, Bihar, Bihar State Building Construction
Campus, Shastri Nagar, Patna through its Chairman.
4. The Chairman, Real State Regulatory Authority, Bihar, Bihar State Building
Construction Campus, Shastri Nagar, Patna.
5. A.S. Ganesh Infra Pvt. Ltd., through its Director Amarkant Singh and Nilam
having its registered office at C/o Shashi Bhushan Singh, Chanakaya Nagar
Colony, Kumhrar, Near Bhagwat Milan Mandir, P.O.- Agamkuan, P.S.-
Agamkuan, District- Patna - 800026.
6. S.P. Singh and Associates, through its Director Shankar Singh, having its
registered office at 308, Hem Plaza, Fraser Road, Chhaju Bagh, P.S.- Gandhi
Maidan, District - Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Gaurav, Advocate
Mr. Rishi Raj, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (22)
Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, AC to GP-22
For the RERA : Mr. Jainandra Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 16-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The writ petition has been filed for the following
Patna High Court CWJC No.20057 of 2025(3) dt.16-03-2026
2/4
reliefs :-
(I) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the
nature of CERTIORARI for quashing the order
dated 15.05.2025 passed by the Respondent no.4 in
RERA /Exe/349/2024 arising out of
RERA/CC/1279/2021 whereby and where under
the Respondent no.4 has been pleased to dispose of
the matter observing that the entire Principal
amount of Rs.12 Lakh has been refunded to the
petitioner by the Respondent 2 set notwithstanding
the fact that out of total amount of Rs.12 Lakhs
given by the petitioner to the Respondent 2 set only
the amount of Rs.6 Lakhs was refunded by the
Respondent 2 set merely on the basis of so-called
statement of the so-called statement of learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
without any support of the document/evidence as
produced by the Respondent 2nd set.
(II) For issuance of an appropriate writ in
the nature of CERTIORARI for quashing the order
dated 02.09.2025 passed by the Respondent no.4 in
RERA /Exe/349/2024 arising out of
RERA/CC/1279/2021 whereby and where under
the Respondent no.4 has been pleased to dispose of
the rectification petition filed by the petitioner for
rectification of the order dated 15.05.2025 holding
that the rectification petition does not come under
the purview of typographical /clerical error and
hence it cannot be entertained at this point of time.
(III) For issuance of an appropriate writ in
the nature of MANDAMUS, commanding and
directing the Respondent 2 set to refund the
remaining amount of principal amount ie. Rs.6
Lacs to the petitioner with 12% compound interest
from the date of payment of principal amount to the
petitioner till the date of its actual payment
forthwith
(IV) For issuance of an appropriate writ in
Patna High Court CWJC No.20057 of 2025(3) dt.16-03-2026
3/4
the nature of MANDAMUS commanding and
directing the Respondent 2 set for payment of
compensation to the petitioner his mental
harassment, financial loss and undue litigations
caused due to malafide intention of the Respondent
20 set.
(V) For issuance of any other appropriate
writ/writs, order/orders direction/ directions for
which the writ petitioner would be entitled under
the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Single Bench of RERA Bihar vide order dated 24.07.2024 had
directed the respondent-bank to refund the principal amount of
Rs.12 lakh to the complainant along with interest at the rate of
marginal cost of fund based leading rate (MCLR) of State Bank
of India as applicable for three years plus 2% interest from the
date of refund within a period of 60 days of issue of order in
question.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that
when the amount in question was not paid, the petitioner is said
to have initiated an execution proceeding by filing a RERA
Exe.349/2024 case, before the RERA Authorities and in view of
incomplete instructions received from the complainant and
being misinformed, the learned counsel for the complainant,
made submissions that the entire amount has been refunded and
in view of the submissions made, the Execution proceeding is
Patna High Court CWJC No.20057 of 2025(3) dt.16-03-2026
4/4
said to have been dropped.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the RERA
does not dispute the factual position and accordingly, in view of
the submissions made by the parties and materials available on
record, this Court, taking note of the fact that the compliance of
the order dated 24.07.2024 has admittedly not been made and
accordingly, finds it appropriate to set aside the order dated
15.05.2025 passed in RERA/Exe/349/2024 arising out of
RERA/CC/1279/2021 and the execution proceeding so initiated
by the complainant is restored to its original file and the
authorities of the RERA are directed to issue appropriate notice
to all concerned and proceed from the stage thereon in
accordance with law, ensuring compliance of the order dated
24.07.2024 passed in RERA/CC/1279 of 2021.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U
Checking your session…