Lawyers and CAs point at delay in delivering justice when members of MahaRERA retire before passing order in a case they heard, which adds to the wait and burden of litigants
Experts point at the plight of litigants when cases are sent for fresh hearings after the retirement or transfer of the previous MahaRERA member on the case. Representation pic
Ensure that MahaRERA members, before their last day in office, pass orders in all matters heard by them so that the litigants do not have to once again present the entire case before the new member assigned to their case, thus delaying the process of delivering justice, appealed lawyers and chartered accountants.
ADVERTISEMENT
This comes as a MahaRERA member, Dr Vijay Satbir Singh, retired on July 10 and Mahesh Phatak, retired IAS official, was appointed as his replacement. Experts claim Dr Singh did not pass orders in some of the cases, which will now have to be heard all over again.
“Knowledge of the retirement date is in the public domain. Once arguments have ensued and concluded and matters are closed for orders, the bench must make all attempts to close the complaints and complete the adjudication process,” said advocate Anil D’Souza, secretary, Bar Association, MahaRERA. “I too had a few important cases, which were heard and argued on several occasions before former member Dr Vijay Satbir Singh, but orders were not passed. We waited with all earnestness till Sunday evening (July 10), but were saddened as we have to present the entire matter once again,” he added.
“Imagine the situation from the point of view of the ordinary, almost invisible, middle-class, tax-paying flat purchaser. Many of them are facing a double dip with heavy EMIs and rent. The complainant is already aggrieved, under pain and financial stress due to the builder’s faults. This is a very sensitive topic and the bench must always make all attempts to judiciously close all cases before upcoming retirement dates,” said D’Souza.
Advocate Godfrey Pimenta, who practises in MahaRERA, termed the overall experience of litigants as pathetic, and said, “People are getting tired of delays in dispensation of justice. People had high hopes when RERA was enacted, but it is now lost due to hearings getting delayed, vacancies being not filled.” He added, “Instances of members retiring after hearing a case but not passing order need to be done away with.”
CA Ramesh Prabhu, founder chairman of MahaSEWA, said, “We have observed that many registrars or competent authorities close the file for order and then take nearly 2 to 3 months to pass the order. When the authority concerned leaves the office without signing the order, the new officer will have to hear the matters once again. This delay puts hardship on the litigants.”
“In one of the cases before the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MahaREAT), a judge had pronounced the operative part just before his retirement but the detailed order was not fully signed by him. This gave the respondent a chance to file a application to set the operative part aside, which was accepted and a fresh hearing started, delaying the order further.
Therefore, precautions should be taken by MahaRERA and MahaREAT to pass orders to deliver justice timely,” Prabhu said.
Advocate Vinod Sampat, founder and president of Flat Users Residents Welfare Association, said, “It is a common problem with quasi-judicial authorities and courts. Once a matter is heard by senior officers, it is kept closed for order. Many times, it so happens that the officer gets transferred but the order is not uploaded. This results in a situation where the new officer is not aware of the facts and obviously will insist on hearing the matter afresh.”
“My suggestion to judicial and quasi-judicial authorities is that they should have a timeline to pass an order once the matter is heard. Countless hours are spent hearing matters afresh which should be avoided,” Sampat concluded.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
