Patna High Court
Sahil Kumar Singh,versusReal Estate Regulatory Authority, Bihar, Through its Secretary,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court interfered with and modified the impugned stay order, setting it aside insofar as it restrains the petitioners' land and the "Surya Signature" project, while permitting RERA to continue its pending proceedings.
Summary
The petitioners, owners of 27 decimals of land in Plot No. 438, challenged an interim stay order dated 27‑08‑2025 issued by the Special Presiding Officer of the Bihar Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) that halted construction and title transfer of their land, now part of the "Surya Signature" project of M/s Surya Nest Build Ltd. The petitioners argued that the original RERA registration of the earlier "Capital Centre" project was void because the authority failed to verify title and plan under Section 4 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and that the stay violated natural justice as they were not heard. The court examined the statutory requirements of the RERA Act, the invalidity of the earlier registration, and the procedural lapses in issuing the stay. It held that the stay order was unlawful and set it aside to the extent it impeded the "Surya Signature" project, while allowing RERA to continue its pending proceedings. The writ petition was consequently disposed of with directions to the parties.
Issues considered
- The validity of the RERA registration of the "Capital Centre" project under Section 4 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
- Whether the interim stay order dated 27‑08‑2025 was issued in violation of natural justice and statutory procedure.
- Whether the stay order should be set aside and the construction of the "Surya Signature" project allowed to proceed.
- Whether the registration of the "Capital Centre" project is void ab initio and can be declared under Section 7 of the RERA Act.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 19, Article 21, Article 300A
- Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 — s. 15, 18, 31, 36, 4, 5, 7
Subjects
- Real Estate Regulation
- RERA
- Stay Order
- Natural Justice
- Property Rights
- Void Registration
- Development Agreement
- Certiorari
- Mandamus
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6242 of 2026
======================================================
1. Sahil Kumar Singh, Son of Late Virendra Kumar Singh, Residents of
Mustafapur, P.S. and P.O. Khagaul, Danapur, District - Patna-801105
2. Anup Kumar, Son of Late Virendra Kumar Singh, Residents of Mustafapur,
P.S. and P.O. Khagaul, Danapur, District - Patna - 801105
3. Rupa Devi Wife of Late Rajat Kumar Residents of Mustafapur, P.S. and P.O.
Khagaul, Danapur, District - Patna - 801105
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Bihar, Through its Secretary, 6th Floor,
Bihar State Building Construction Corporation Campus, Rajbanshi Nagar,
Patna 801103, Bihar. E-mail [email protected]
2. M/s Sri Anuanand Constructions Pvt. Ltd., through its Director, Mr. Bimal
Kumar, Address Kumar Tower, 1st Floor, Boring Road, P.S. - S.K. District
Patna 800001, Bihar. Mobile No. 7371900001. E-mail -
[email protected]
3. M/s Surya Nest Build Ltd., through its Director Mr. Tarun Kumar, S/o - Late
Jagdish Prasad Singh, Address Nutan Tower, Kankarbagh, Patna 800020,
Bihar.
4. Mr. Manish Kumar S/o- Sri Rabindra Nath Choudhary, Chitrakuta Nagar,
Road No.-1, B.B. Ganj, Bhagwanpur, Dist- Muzaffarpur 842001, Bihar.
Mob. No 7763805100. [email protected]
5. Abhishek Anand S/o - Sri Surya Deo Singh, And Ruchi Gupta S/o- Vishnu
Kumar Gupta, Address Flat No. 204, Ganga-4, Jalalpur City, Ram Jaipal
Nagar, Opposite Gola Road, Danapur Cum Khagaul, Patna 8294777993.
801503, Bihar. Mob. No. [email protected]
6. Anju Kumari D/o- Sri Bharat Singh And Mr. Lokesh Kumar S/o- Late Sheo
Shankar Singh, Address- Gaytree Niwas, Road No. 17-A, Mahadev Path,
Near Veerkunwar Singh Chowk, Rajiv Nagar, Patna- 800024 Mob. No.
9472277166 [email protected]
7. Mrs. Ananya Agrawal W/o- Sri Kaushal Kumar, 604, Block-G, Kashyap
Green City. Kothwan, Dist- Patna- 801503, Bihar. Mob. No. 9439784864. E-
[email protected]
8. Mr. Manendra Kumar, College Mor, Baradari, Opposite Shiv Temple, P.O.-
Bihar Sharif, P.S.- Bihar Sharif, Dist- Nalanda-803101, Bihar. Mob. No.-
9546478236 [email protected]
9. Samrendra Kumar Suman S/o Deo Narayan Poddar, And Mrs. Minakshi
Devi W/o-Samrendra Kumar Suman, Address Flat No. 304, Agam Atma.
Apartment, New Patliputra Colony, Near Paani Tanki, P.O. and P.S.-
Patliputra, Dist- Patna-800013, E-mail-Bihar. Mob. No. 9431015543.
[email protected]
10. Mr. Dharmendra Sharma, VPO-Adhampur, P. Pur Halai, P.S.- Sarairanjan,
Dist-No- 9431015543. E-mail- Samastipur- 848505 Bihar Mob.
[email protected]
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
2/22
11. Bishwas Kumar, West Karyanand Nagar, Ward No. 09. Near Airtel Tower,
Lakhisarai-811311, Bihar. Mob. No. 9431015543. E-mail-
[email protected]
12. Dr. Naz Bano Khan W/o- Masih Azam, Didar Manzil, Sadaruddin Chak,
Habibpur, Dist- Bhagalpur- 813113, Bihar. Mob. No. 9931824963 E-mail-
[email protected]
13. Pranita Kumari D/o Parmanand Singh. Saroj Bhawan, Bihari Saw Lane,
Muradpur, Arya Kumar Road, Bankipore, Dist- Patna- 800004, Bihar Mob.
No.-8340641885. [email protected]
14. Md. Manzoor Naseer, 40, Didar Manzil, Sadaruddinchak, Habibpur, Dist-
Bhagalpur-813113, Bihar. Mob. No. 9431015543. E-mail-
[email protected]
15. Mr. Navin Kumar S/o- Sri Sarba Nand Singh, Vitt Bibhag Colony, Phase-2,
Khajpura, B.V. College, Dist- Patna 800014, Bihar. Mob. No. 8295088611.
[email protected]
16. Mr. Ashish Kumar Singh, B6, No.-73, HP Housing Complex. Near PM Mall,
Patliputra Colony, Patna- 800013, Bihar. Mob. No. 9431015543. E-mail-
[email protected]
17. Mr. Debashish Kumar, Bhatauna, Dist-Muzaffarpur-843113. Bihar, Mob.
No.-8210511431. [email protected]
18. Rinki Sinha W/o- Sanjay Kumar Sinha, Near Bus Stand, New Sital Tola
Karmantola, Ward No.-38, Ara, Dist- Bhojpur-802301, Bihar Mob. No.
8409480911. [email protected]
19. Mr. Vinod Kumar Verma S/o- Sri Baidya Nahi Prasad Verma, House No. E-
4/2, IGIMS Campus, Sheikhpura, Rukunpura, Patna B.V. College, Dist-
Patna-800014, Bihar Mob. No. 9473191825. E-mail- [email protected]
20. Poonam Singh, Baikunthwa Jainagar, P.O.- Khadda Kunjlahi, P.S.- Nautan
Baikunthwa, Dist-West Champaran- 845438, Bihar. Mob. No.-9968572563.
[email protected]
21. Dr. Arun Kumar Sahu S/o- Sri Ram Narayan Sahu, Musapur, Sree
Krishnapuri, Near R.N.A.R College, Dsit- Samastipur- 848101, Bihar. Mob.
No.-9431245957. [email protected]
22. Dr. Nidhi Arun W/o- Sri Mukesh Kumar, Jalalpur Heights, RPS Ro
Mansarovar Colony, Opposite RPS More, Danapur, Patna- 801503, Bihar.
Mob. No. 9523594059. [email protected]
23. Mr. Anand Dev S/o- Devendra Prasad Gupta, Ghari Khana, Behind
Hanuman Temple, Dinapur Cum Khagaul, Dist- Patna- 801105, Bihar. Mob.
No. 9470091034. [email protected]
24. Mrs. Nidhi Kumari W/o- Sri Sachin Kumar Sinha, Vill - Behind RPS Mahila
College, P.O. -Rupaspur, Danapur Cum Khagaul, Patna-801503, Mob. No.
8299882707. [email protected]
25. Mr. Awadh Kishore Singh S/o- Sri Ragho Singh, Ward No.- 05,
Makhdumpur, Station Road, P.O.- Shaikhpura, Dist- Shaikhpura-811105.
Mob. No. 9431015543. E-mail-. [email protected]
26. Mr Shailendra Shekhar, Aakash Nikunj, C/o- Devanand Jha, Rajiv Nagar,
Road Patna-No.-14, 800024. Mob. [email protected]
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
3/22
27. Mrs. Roop Nidhi W/o- Mr. Mantu Kumar Tiwari, House No. B/24, Road
No.-18. Rajiv Nagar, Patna- 800024, Bihar. Mob. No. 9798042307. E-mail-
[email protected]
28. Mrs. Kavita Kumari W/o- Sri Niraj Kumar Sah. Deo Pushpa Computrised
Orthopedic and Poly Clinic Centre, Sikandra Road, Mahisaudhi, Jamui-
811307, Bihar. Mob. No.-8709116049. [email protected]
29. Mrs. Poonam Kumari Gupta, House No. 8, S.B.I. Officers Colony No.-1.
Near IGIMS, Sheikhpura, Bailey Road, Patna-800014, Bihar. Mob. No.
8527263693. [email protected]
30. Mr. Niraj Kumar Sah S/o- Devnarayan Sah And Mrs. Kavita Kumari W/o-
Mr. Niraj Kumar Sah, Address- Deo Pushpa Computrised Orthopedic and
Poly Clinic Centre, Sikandra Road, Mahisaudhi, Jamui- 811307 Bihar, Mob.
No. 8709116049 (Complainant) [email protected]
31. Ms. Deepti Kumari D/o- Dr. Mahendra Kumar, Gardpar, College Road.
Baradari, Opposite Shiv Temple, P.O. and P.S.- Bihar Sharif, Dist- Nalanda-
803101, Bihar. Mob. No.-9431015543. [email protected]
32. Mr. Satyanjay Kumar S/o- Bhupendra Prasad, Vill. - Suhawanpur Surhi,
P.O.Suhawanpur Surhi, P.S. - Islampur, Sakri, Laranpur, Dist. - Nalanda -
803116, Bihar, Mob. No. 9431015543. [email protected]
33. Mrs. Laxmi Kumari W/o- Mukesh Kumar Pandey, Nagarpura, P.S.- Simri,
Paigambarpur, Dist- Buxar- 802120, Bihar. Mob. No. 7399522250. E-mail-
[email protected]
34. Mr. Shashank Mohan Jha S/o- Late Awadhesh Kumar Jha, Near Gyan Jyoti
School, Surkhikal, Tilkamanjhi, Jagdishpur, Dist-Bhagalpur-812001. Bihar.
Mob. No.-9399030311. E-mail- [email protected]
35. Mrs. Surbhi Ranjan W/o- Padmanabh Rajan, Q.No. -E3, Old BSEB Colony
Near TRW, Phulwari, Dist- Patna- 800023. Mob. No. 9931860676.
(Complainant) [email protected]
36. Mr. Om Prakash Singh S/o- Birender Prasad Singh, Flat No.- 5, Taluka
Apartment, Ram Jaipal Road, Bailey Road, Patna-801503. Bihar. Mob. No.-
9431020153 E-mail- [email protected]
37. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha S/o- Late Ranjit Kumar Sinha, 304, Satyawati
Complex, Kankarbagh Main Road, East of Chandan Hero Service,
Sampatchak, Dist- Patna-800020. Mob. E-mail-No.-7870544011.
[email protected]
38. Mr. Alok Chandra Jha, Flat No.- 609, Vrindavan Garden, Ashiana Digha
Road, Dist-Patna-800025, Bihar. Mob. No. 9931045468. E-mail-
[email protected]
39. Mrs. Priya Jha W/o- Mr. Alok Chandra Jha, Flat No. 609, Vrindavan Garden,
Ashiana Digha Road, Dist- Patna-800025, Bihar. Mob. No. 9431263164. E-
[email protected]
40. Mr. Rakesh Kumar S/o- Ram Shreshtha Mahto, Vill- Tilanghi, P.O.- Banar
Jhula, Bandar Jhula, Dist- Sitamarhi- 843317, Bihar. Mob. No.-
9434795952. [email protected]
41. Mr. Saurabh Ranjan Shrivastava S/o- Surendra Prasad Shrivastava, Vill -
Dist - 841243 8789677420. Nautan, Siwan-Mob. No-
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
4/22
[email protected]
42. Mrs. Monika Kumari W/o- Prakash Anupam, Vill and P.O.- Dumri, Dakhali,
Kothia, Madhopur, Dighrua, Dist- Samastipur 848122. Mob. No.
9430868178. E-mail-prakashanupam [email protected]
43. Mr. Kumar Gaurav S/o- Sri Shyamn Prakash Narayan Singh, Ward No. 14,
Someshwar Nath Colony, Badi Yusufpur, P.O.-Hajipur, P.S.- Hajipur, Dist-
Vaishali-844101. Mob. No. 7004167918. E-mail-
[email protected]
44. Om Prakash Singh S/o- Sri Satya Narayan Singh, House No. 45, Danapur
Cantt Road Khagaul, Mustafapur, P.S.- Khagaul, Dist- Patna- 801105. Mob.
No.-9334833040. [email protected]
45. Mr. Sumit Kumar S/o- Sri Lalan Prasad Singh, Sikaria, Rukhae, Nalanda-
803108, Bihar. Mob. No. 8227813340. E-mail- [email protected]
46. Mr. Sanjay Kumar S/o- Sri Shatrughna Saw, And Mrs. Sushma Suman W/o-
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Address- Dwarika Bigha, P.O.- Chero, P.S.-Harnaut,
Dist- Nalanda-803110, Bihar. Mob. No. 8940073923. E-mail-
[email protected]
47. Dr. Aishwerye Singh W/o- Dr. Pramod Kumar. C-33. Jagat Amrawati
Apartment, Behind Officers Flat, Bailey Road, Dist Patna-800001. Mob.
No-8603804971. [email protected]
48. Mr. Meena Singh C/o- Aakash Show, House No.- F/2, Mangal Road, Old
PESU Campus, Electricity Department, Dist- Patna- 800015. Mob. No.
9199398444. E-mail- [email protected]
49. Mr. Raghvendra Prasad S/o- Late Diwakar Kumar, Seva Kutir, Keshari
Nagar, P.O... Keshari Nagar, P.S.- Patliputra, Dist- Patna-800024, Bihar.
Mob. No-9709700366. [email protected]
50. Mrs. Shikha Anugrah W/o- Shri Ritesh Chandra Sinha, Flat No. C-303, S P
Griham Apartment, New Paras Nath Garden, Ashiana Nagar, Dist- Patna-
800025, 9471433703. Mob. [email protected]
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pratik Sinha,
Mr. Nivedita Chaudhary, Advocates.
For the RERA : Mr. Jainandra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Ojaswi Ishani, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ajay, GA-5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
5 06-05-2026 Heard Mr. Pratik Sinha, learned counsel for the
petitioners duly assisted by Ms. Nivedita Chaudhary, learned
counsel, Mr. Jainendra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
5/22
RERA and Mr. Ajay, learned counsel for the Respondents.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief(s):-
“(i) For the issuance of a writ in
the nature of Certiorari, or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction, for
quashing the impugned order dated
27.08.2025 passed by the, Special Presiding
Officer, Real Estate Regulatory Authority,
Bihar (hereinafter referred to as "RERA"), in
RERA/CC-219/2023 and other analogous
cases, whereby the Authority has stayed the
construction and transfer of title (on the
subject land of Petitioners bearing Plot No.
438, Khata No. 180 Area -27 Decimal, at
Khagaul, Patna), by the new promoter Sri
Tarun Kumar, Director of M/s Surya Nest
Build Ltd. has been stayed till further order,
though the land in question is not a part of
the litigation in question before RERA Bihar
and the erstwhile promoter has given
undertaking to compensate the stakeholder,
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
6/22
if any. And the interim order of stay is/will
affecting (affect) a large number of buyers of
the "Surya Signature Project, as well as the
huge financial loss to the petitioner.
(ii) For the issuance of a writ in
the nature of Mandamus, or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction,
declaring the registration of the project
'Capital Centre (granted on 06.12.2018) as
void ab initio and non-est in the eyes of the.
law, having been obtained through
misrepresentation and without a validly
sanctioned plan from the competent
authority;
(iii) For the issuance of a writ in
the nature of Mandamus, or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction,
directing the RERA Authority (Respondent
No. 1) to discharge the Petitioners and
Respondent No. 3 from the ongoing RERA
proceedings, on the ground of lack of privity
of contract with the home buyers of
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
7/22
Respondent No. 2,
(iv) For a further direction to the
Respondent No. 1 RERA Authority to allow
the Petitioners and Respondent No. 3 to
proceed with the construction and
development of their project without any
interference arising from the invalid and
illegal registration of Respondent No. 2's
project;
(v) For the issuance of an ad-
interim order staying the operation and
effect of the impugned order dated
27.08.2025 during the pendency of this writ
petition, so as to allow the construction of
Respondent No. 3's (M/s Surya Nest Build
Ltd.) project to proceed in the larger interest
of several innocent home buyers and the
Petitioners as well as the developer (M/s
Surya Nest Build Ltd.);
(vi) For any other relief or reliefs
as your Lordships may deem fit and proper
in the interest of justice and equity.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
8/22
FACTUAL MATRIX
3. The factual matrix of the present case concerns the
Petitioners' absolute ownership of 27 decimals of land in Plot
No. 438, Khata No. 180, located at Village Mustafapur,
Danapur/Khagaul, Patna (the "Subject Land"), which was
illegally entangled in a defunct real estate project. The dispute
originated when Respondent No. 2 (M/s Sri Anuanand
Constructions Pvt. Ltd.) obtained a RERA Registration
Certificate on 06.12.2018 (Registration No. BRERAP00393-
2/87/R-279/2018) for a project titled "Capital Centre"
(Annexure-P/2), which included Plot No. 438 despite the
concerned Respondent having no title, interest, or development
rights at that time. This registration was granted by the RERA
Authority (Respondent No. 1) in blatant violation of Section 4
of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 the
(in short ‘RERA Act’, which mandates the verification of legal
title and validly sanctioned plans. Under compulsion due to the
land being a "block land" with access issues, the Petitioners
eventually executed a Development Agreement on 29.04.2019
while registration certificate by RERA was granted on
06.12.2018. However, RERA's role was compromised from the
start; the Authority registered the project conditionally without
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
9/22
mandatory Environmental Clearance (EC), extending this
liberty in March 2019 without legal justification, thereby failing
its duty under Section 5 of RERA Act to ensure compliance
before granting registration.
4. The integrity of the project's legal standing further
collapsed regarding the sanctioned maps, which were initially
approved under the name "SAI CITY" (later "Capital Centre")
by Nagar Parishad Khagaul vide Plan Case No. 09/16-17 on
28.06.2016. These plans were later discovered to be invalid as
the land fell within the territorial jurisdiction of the Patna
Mahanagar Area Authority, not the Nagar Parishad. An RTI
response dated 17.11.2025 from Nagar Parishad Khagaul
(Annexure-P/3) formally admitted the maps were approved
without legal authority. Following an inquiry by a Three-
Member Committee, which submitted its report on 04.12.2025
(Annexure-P/4 and P/5) recommending cancellation and
departmental action against the then Executive Officer, the
Competent Authority officially cancelled the project maps on
09.12.2025 (Annexure-P/4). Meanwhile, due to Respondent No.
2's failure to progress the development for over three years
submitting its last quarterly report only for the period ending
20.06.2022, the Petitioners exercised their right under the
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
10/22
development agreement to rescind the agreement entered with
Respondent No.2. This resulted in a registered Deed of Cancellation
dated 20.12.2022 (Annexure-P/6), which effectively severed all ties
between the Subject Land and the defunct "Capital Centre" project.
5. Following the cancellation, the Petitioners entered
into a fresh development arrangement with Respondent No. 3
(M/s Surya Nest Build Ltd.) via a registered agreement on
08.02.2023 for the "Surya Signature" project. While this new
construction was progressing, homebuyers from the original
defunct project-initiated complaints, leading the RERA
Authority to pass an impugned order on 27.08.2025 in
RERA/CC-219/2023 and analogous cases (Annexure-P/1). This
order arbitrarily stayed construction and the transfer of title on
the Petitioners' Plot No. 438, despite the land no longer being
part of the "Capital Centre" litigation. The Petitioners argue that
this stay is a violation of the principles of Natural Justice (audi
alteram partem) as they were not heard, and it constitutes a
"colorable exercise of power" by RERA to mask its own initial
failure to verify documents under Section 4 of the RERA Act.
The stay on the Petitioners' 27 decimals has effectively
paralyzed the entire "Block A" of Respondent No. 3’s project
which spans 627 decimals because the building shares a unified
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
11/22
foundation and structural frame.
6. Legally, the Petitioners contend that the original
RERA registration was void ab initio and a legal nullity
obtained through misrepresentation, which RERA should have
revoked under Section 7 of the RERA Act. They rely on the
settled principle from Vishnu Vardhan v. State of U.P. (2025
SCC OnLine SC 1501) that "fraud vitiates everything" and the
Bombay High Court's ruling in M/s K.K. Vidyut v. Union of
India WP (L) No. 35600 of 2024 that fraud is an irremediable
breach. Furthermore, Respondent No. 2 has admitted its
inability to complete the project and offered to refund
homebuyers, effectively converting the dispute into a monetary
claim under Section 18 of the RERA Act. Citing Dalpat Kumar
v. Prahlad Singh (1992) 1 SCC 719, the Petitioners argue that
the balance of convenience lies with them, as staying a multi-
crore project involving only 4% of the land area causes
irreparable injury to innocent home buyers of Respondent No. 3.
Ultimately, the Petitioners assert that the RERA stay lacks the
"authority of law" required under Article 300A of the
Constitution, as it is founded upon an unauthorized registration
and a rescinded agreement, thereby constituting an
unconstitutional deprivation of their right to property.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
12/22
7. Evidently, the petitioners were initially approached
by the Respondent No.2, M/s Sri Anuanand Constructions Pvt.
Ltd. with a proposal to integrate the subject land into a real
estate development project titled ‘Capital Centre’ and because of
certain jurisdictional issues which was subsequently, busted out
wherein the sanction of the project was called in question and
ultimately through a Committee constituted, the same was
cancelled and since the project could not be completed within
the time so stipulated, mutually the development agreement
which was signed by the petitioner with Respondent No.2, M/s
Sri Anuanand Constructions Pvt. Ltd. has been rescinded and
fresh development agreement is said to have been arrived with
Respondent No.3, Rupa Devi and even the project in the name
of ‘Surya Signature’ has been sanctioned by Patna Metropolitan
Area Authority, which granted approval of the revised map as
against the registered development agreement vide Registered
Deed No. 985 dated 08.02.2023, which would be apparent from
Letter No. 653 dated 27.05.2025 issued under signature of the
Superintending Engineer of the Authority.
8. This matter was heard on 24.04.2026 and the
challenge having been made with regard to the interim order by
which the entire project of ‘Surya Signature’ in which the
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
13/22
petitioners’ plot is also a part of sanctioned map is said to have
been stalled by RERA Authority on the complaints made by the
prospective buyers of Respondent No.2, M/s Sri Anuanand
Constructions Pvt. Ltd, ignoring the fact that the stay over the
Petitioners' 27 decimals has effectively paralyzed the entire
"Block A" of Respondent No. 3’s project which spans 627
decimals because the building shares a unified foundation and
structural frame, this Court had directed the learned counsel
representing the RERA Authority to take instruction with regard
to the manner in which they proposed to protect the interest of
the prospective home buyers, by keeping the project stalled
under the interim orders, which is said to have been passed by
the original authorities vide its order dated 27.08.2025 on the
subject land of the petitioner and till date no further hearing has
taken place in the matter by showing such callous approach in
dealing with the sensitive matter, while the RERA has to take a
very pragmatic approach in these issues, which would invite
penal action against the promoter or others connected with the
project including home-buyers.
9. In response to the query made by this Court vide
order dated 24.04.2026, learned counsel for the RERA
authorities is said to have filed a counter affidavit and has relied
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
14/22
upon paragraphs-14, 16 and 17 which are reproduced
hereunder:-
“14 That, it is pertinent to submit
that the Registration Certificate issued for
the project expressly incorporates and
reflects all the Khata and Plot numbers as
detailed in the foregoing paragraphs as well
as in the Development Agreement. It is
further submitted that the RERA, upon due
consideration of the application and after
conducting proper scrutiny and verification
in strict compliance with the mandate and
rigor of Section 4 of the Real Estate
(Regulation and Development) Act, 2016,
granted registration to Respondent No. 2,
namely M/s Anuanand Private Limited, for
its project "Capital Centre." The said project
was duly registered on 06.12.2018, bearing
Registration No. BRERAP00393-2/287/R-
297/2018, 16.
………………..
16. That, in clear contravention of
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
15/22
Section 15 of the Real Estate (Regulation
and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), the
Petitioner who is also the Landowner and a
Promoter in accordance with Regulation 6 of
the Bihar Real Estate Regulatory Authority
(General) Regulation, 2024 without
obtaining the prior consent of at least two-
thirds of the allottees, executed a Deed of
Cancellation of Development Agreement
bearing Token No. 20210/2022 dated
20.12.2022 with the Respondent No. 2, M/s
Sri Anuanand Construction Pvt. Ltd
purportedly cancelling the earlier
Development Agreement bearing Token No.
6041/2019. Prima facie, the Petitioner along
with the Respondent No. 2, M/s Sri
Anuanand Construction Pvt. Ltd is also
guilty of contravention of Section 15 of the
Act knowing very well that any such move
would be detrimental to the interests of the
homebuyers of the project "Capital Centre".
17. It is most respectfully
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
16/22
submitted before this Hon'ble Court that the
Development Agreement that was duly
submitted to RERA for the registration of the
project "Capital Centre" was executed in the
year 2013, which continues to hold the field
as the Development Agreement of 2019 was
cancelled through the aforesaid Deed of
Cancellation and was never disclosed or
submitted before the RERA Authority. It
appears that the Petitioner is guilty of
misleading the Hon'ble Court on account of
presenting the facts related to cancellation of
a Development Agreement of 2019 as a false
premise of the instant case, that would
amount to concealment of facts on one hand
and perpetration of fraud on the Authority
on the count of non-disclosure of fact related
to entering into a new agreement for the
same parcel of land and its subsequent
cancellation on the other.”
10. From perusal of the statements made in the
aforesaid paragraphs of the counter affidavit, the procedures
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
17/22
which have been incorporated in the legislation under Section
31, and 35 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development)
Act, 2016, (for short ‘the Act, 2016) the authorities are duty
bound to entertain the compliant once it is made by the
aggrieved parties or even such issues can suo motu be gone into
by them and for arriving to a just conclusion, the authorities
have the power to call upon any promoter or allottee or the real
estate agent to seek all such informations or explanations
relating to its affairs, which the authorities may require or even
they have the power to call upon one or more persons to make
an inquiry in relation to the affairs of any promoter or allotee or
the real estate agent, as the case may be, but before exercising
the powers as stipulated under Section 36 of the ‘RERA Act,
2016’ and passing the order impugned, it is evident that no such
statutory exercise is said to have been carried out and
straightway the interim order stalling the entire projects of
‘Surya Signature’ has been directed in which the petitioners’
property forms part of the said project and it is their case that
merely because the property in question, apart from the other
properties, which formed part of the projects of Respondent No.
2 (M/s Sri Anuanand Constructions Pvt. Ltd.), though the said
project namely ‘Capital Centre’ has already been rescinded
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
18/22
followed with registration by RERA having also been cancelled,
there was no occasion before RERA Authority to have directed
unilateral stay of project vide order impugned dated 27.08.2025,
which admittedly affects the rights of the promoter and as also
the land owner, who have not been heard before passing the
order impugned, cannot be allowed to sustain insofar it relates
to stay of the project.
11. Upon perusal of the materials on record and after
going through the statutory scheme, there can be no denial that
the original authorities of RERA do have the power to entertain
the complaint made by the aggrieved parties and in order to
arrive to a just conclusion, it has the power to call upon any
promoter or allottee or real state agent for fetching of such
necessary informations and as also the requisite explanation
relating to its affairs, which power the authority of RERA is
bestowed with in the interest of justice to protect the right of all
the connected persons with the project, before taking any
coercive measure under the statute but the manner in which the
authorities are said to have passed the interim order staying the
project in question, which is said to have been approved by the
Patna Metropolitan Area Authority suffers from the vice of non
application of mind and even the procedures prescribed for
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
19/22
issuing such orders have admittedly been deviated and such
deviation by the authorities is indeed in the teeth of the judicial
pronouncements made right since the Privy Council, which may
be referred in the case of Nazir Ahmad v. Kind Emperor
wherein it has been held “that where a power is given to do a
certain thing in a certain way the thing must be done in that
way or not at all. Other methods of performance are
necessarily forbidden.”
12. Similar view has also been taken by the three
Judges Bench of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chandra
Kishore Jha v. Mahavir Prasad & Ors as reported in (1999) 8
SCC 266, which is as under:-
“17…….It is a well-settled salutary
principle that if a statute provides for a thing to be
done in a particular manner, then it has to be done
in that manner and in no other manner. (See with
advantage: Nazir Ahmad v. King Emperor
MANU/PR/0119/1936: (1935-36) 63 IA 372 AIR
1936 PC 253 (11)], Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v.
State of V.P. MANU/SC/0053/1954: AIR 1954 SC
322 1954 SCR 1098), State of U.P. v. Singhara
Singh [MANU/SC/0082/1963: AIR 1964 SC 358:
(1964) 1 SCWR 57].) An election petition under the
Rules could only have been presented in the open
court up to 16-5-1995 till 4.15 pm (working hours
of the Court) in the manner prescribed by Rule 6
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
20/22
(supra) either to the Judge or the Bench as the case
may be to save the period of limitation. That,
however, was not done.…”
13. The said principle has further been followed by
the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Cherukuri Mani v.
Chief Secretary, Government of Andra Pradesh & Ors wherein
the Hon’ble Apex court has held as under:-
“14. Where the law prescribes a thing to
be done in a particular manner following a
particular procedure, it shall be done in the same
manner following the provisions of law, without
deviating from the prescribed procedure…..”
14. The law is well settled that the procedures which
have been prescribed in the statute that must be followed before
taking any decision or for passing any order, which admittedly,
has not been resorted, as such, this Court has no hesitation in
interfering with such interim order to the extent, which stalls the
entire project being in no way connected to the dispute in
question with mutual cancellation of development agreement
much less when an undertaking by the Respondent No.2 has
already been put in place before the authority to protect the
interest of the home buyers besides the rights of the promoters
having found to be violated which is protected under Articles 19
& 21 of the Constitution of India.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
21/22
15. The further flaws in the impugned order can be
deduced from the materials available on record that the
registration granted to Respondent No.2 was in violation of
Section 4 of the ‘RERA Act’ in respect of the rescinded project
being ‘Capital Centre’ and even principle of natural justice was
not followed as the petitioners and Respondent No.3 were not
given hearing at the time of passing the impugned order staying
the project of Respondent No.3, which calls for an interference
to deal with the rights being affected to the parties connected
with the project in question.
16. Accordingly, the order dated 27.08.2025 passed
by the Special Presiding Officer, Real Estate Regulatory
Authority, Bihar in RERA/CC-219/2023 is interfered to the
extent whereunder the petitioners’ land which forms part of the
project of Respondent No.3/M/s Surya Nest Build Ltd, having
been approved by the Patna Metropolitan Area Authority
through fresh development agreement in the name of ‘Surya
Signature’ Project, has been stayed without any plausible
reason, which is in violation of the dictum of Hon’ble Apex
Court wherein it has been held that the orders affecting the
rights of the parties must be based on sound reasoning as they
are treated to be heart and soul of any decision, which
Patna High Court CWJC No.6242 of 2026(5) dt.06-05-2026
22/22
apparently is absent from the impugned order, is accordingly,
modified to the extent by directing the authorities not to create
any impediment in allowing the ‘Surya Signature’ project to
proceed in accordance with law, further the initiatives so taken
by the RERA authorities, on the complaints of aggrieved home-
buyers to protect their interest, is not being interfered, and the
proceedings which is said to have been initiated on the
complaint filed under Section 31 of ‘the Act, 2016’ will continue
and these petitioners and the other respondents are directed to
appear in terms of the directions issued by the original
authorities of RERA in the pending proceedings being
RERA/CC-219/2023, and the parties connected with the issues
would be at liberty to file their respective responses, which the
authority will take appropriate decisions to protect the rights of
home-buyers in accordance with law, who is equipped with all
the powers of the Civil Court.
17. The writ petition stands disposed of with the
observations and directions made above.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
perwez
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.