In a significant ruling clarifying the jurisdiction of the adjudicating officer under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA), the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (REAT) has held that complaints seeking directions for developmental works and compensation cannot be directly entertained by the adjudicating officer without following the statutory procedure prescribed under the Act and the Haryana RERA Rules.The Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (REAT) has held that complaints seeking directions for developmental works and compensation cannot be directly entertained by the adjudicating officer without following the statutory procedure prescribed under the Act and the Haryana RERA Rules (Getty Images/iStockphoto/ Representational image)The tribunal, headed by justice Rajan Gupta (chairman) and Dinesh Singh Chauhan (member-technical), passed the order on July 1 while allowing a batch of appeals filed by M/s St. Patricks Realty Private Limited against orders passed by the adjudicating officer of the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA), Gurugram. The appeals arose from complaints filed by allottees seeking construction of a boundary wall, development of a 24-metre road and compensation for alleged structural defects.Appearing for the appellant, advocate Harshit Batra argued that the adjudicating officer exceeded the jurisdiction conferred under Section 71 of the RERA Act read with Rules 28 and 29 of the Haryana RERA Rules.He submitted that the adjudicating officer is empowered only to adjudicate compensation after conducting an inquiry as prescribed under the Rules. Under Rule 28, the authority must first establish a violation by the promoter before referring the matter to the AO for determination of compensation. Since this mandatory procedure was not followed, the complaints had not reached the stage where compensation could legally be adjudicated.Accepting the appellant’s contentions, the tribunal observed that the reliefs sought by the allottees regarding project development, including construction of a boundary wall and development of internal roads, fall within the jurisdiction of the regulatory authority and not the adjudicating officer. It held that compensation claims relating to alleged structural defects must be processed strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Rules 28 and 29 of the Haryana RERA Rules.The tribunal also ruled that the question of maintainability goes to the root of the adjudicating officer’s jurisdiction and should have been decided at the threshold. Since this was not done, the adjudicating officer had exercised jurisdiction not vested in law.Accordingly, the tribunal set aside the impugned orders and held that the complaints filed before the adjudicating officer were not maintainable, while allowing all the connected appeals.