DECENT BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                         WRIT - C No. - 31779 of 2026

Decent Buildwell Private Limited
                                                             .....Petitioner(s)
                                    Versus

State Of U.P. And 4 Others
                                                           .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                    :   Pratik Chandra
Counsel for Respondent(s)                    :   C.S.C., Mohd. Afzal

Court No. - 5
                     HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
                     HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.

1. Heard Sri Pratik Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 & 4 and Sri
Mohd. Afzal, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 & 3.

2. In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful
purpose would be served by putting the respondent no.5 to notice
and keeping this petition pending before this Court. However, in case
respondent no.5 feels aggrieved by the order his right to seek
modification/variation of the order is being kept reserved.

3. The writ petition in question has been filed inter-alia with the
following prayers :-

"1. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the
order dated 03.07.2026 issued by Recovery Officer (Revenue), U.P. Real
Estate Regulatory Authority (Regional Office H1-69, Sector-Gama-2), Gautam
Budh Nagar pertaining to Complaint Case No.NCR144/03/88533/2022 (Manoj
Kumar Giri V. M/s Decent Buildwell Pvt. Ltd.).


2. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the
recovery certificate dated 02.02.2026 issued by Secretary- Real Estate
Regulatory Authority, Gautam Budh Nagar addressed to District Magistrate,
Gautam Budh Nagar under Section 40 of the RERA Act, 2016 pertaining to
Complaint Case No.NCR144/03/88533/2022.
                                                        WRIC No. 31779 of 2026
                                 2


3. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the
respondents to recall the recovery certificate dated 02.02.2026 and to issue a
fresh after adjusting the amount to the tune of Rs.27,94,805/- which has
already been paid by the petitioner."

4. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to order
dated 05.09.2023 passed by respondent no.2 in the proceedings
initiated by the respondent no.5 an order was passed directing the
petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.22,90,893/- plus interest. It is further
argued that petitioner has already transferred a sum of Rs.24 lacs
with the respondent bank as well as allottee thereafter moved an
application before the Recovery Officer (Revenue) dated 16.04.2026
to recall the order since the remaining amount has already been paid.
The aforesaid application was rejected by the Recovery Officer
(Revenue)/respondent no.3 vide order dated 03.07.2026 hence
present writ petition.

5. It is argued by Mohd. Afzal, learned counsel for the respondent
nos.2 & 3 that in case petitioner wants to recall/modified the order
passed by the respondent no.2, he should move an application
before the respondent no.2 in the aforesaid proceedings but till date
no such application has been filed hence petitioner is not entitled for
the relief as prayed for in the present case.

6. In response to the same it is argued by counsel for the petitioner
that petitioner is ready and willing to make a proper application before
the respondent no.2 raising all his grievances as has been raised in
the present case.

7. In the facts and circumstances, petitioner is permitted to submit a
fresh representation ventilating all his grievances before the
respondent no.2-Secretary, Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory
Authority (UP RERA), Regional Office at H-169, Sector Gamma-2,
Greator Noida, Gautam Buddh Nagar, U.P. along-with all the
materials on which he placed reliance in the present writ petition and
along-with certified copy of this order within a period of two weeks
from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent no.2 is
directed to pass necessary order in accordance with law within a
                                                                                        WRIC No. 31779 of 2026
                                                                    3


                                    further period of four weeks.

                                    8. With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition is disposed of
                                    finally.

                                    9. Since the writ petition has been decided on an exparte version
                                    without seeking any response from the respondents, thus passing of
                                    the order today may not be construed to an expression that this Court
                                    has gone into the merits of the matter and the second respondent
                                    shall accord independent consideration strictly in accordance with law
                                    and the mandate of law holding the field.



                                                                        (Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.)
                                    September 29, 2026
                                    Pramod Tripathi




Digitally signed by :-
PRAMOD TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad