Listen to this article in summarized format
The Supreme Court on Thursday came down heavily on RERA (Real Estate Regulatory Authority), saying the real estate body is doing nothing except facilitating defaulting builders and it won’t mind if the institution was abolished, as per a report by the Press Trust of India (PTI).
Income Tax Guide
Income Tax Union Budget FY 2026-27 LiveIncome Tax Slabs FY 2025-26Income Tax Calculator 2025
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said the people for whom RERA was created were ‘completely depressed, disgusted and disappointed’. The bench said it was high time all states should rethink of even constituting an agency like RERA.
The bench’s observation came in the case of the State of Himachal Pradesh vs Naresh Sharma (Case No. SLP(C) No. 005835-/2026), where the bench issued a notice on a plea filed by the Himachal Pradesh government and others, challenging an order of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in a matter pertaining to the shifting of the state RERA office from Shimla to Dharamshala.
The bench permitted the Himachal Pradesh government to shift the RERA office to the place of its choice, saying it shall be subject to the final outcome of the writ petition pending before the High Court, as per the PTI report.
What did CJI said in his observation on February 12, 2026?
“Except facilitating the builders in default, this institution is doing nothing. Better abolish this institution, we don’t mind that,” the CJI said on Thursday.
“…high time that all the states should revisit and rethink of even constituting this authority,” the bench said.
Why did Himachal Pradesh High Court say in its stay order?
The Himachal Pradesh High Court had earlier stayed a June 2025 notification of the state government concerning the shifting of the state RERA office till a further order.
Later, in another order passed on December 30, 2025, the High Court directed the continuance of its interim order.
The Apex Court stayed the High Court’s December 30 direction.
What was Himachal Pradesh government’s stance in the matter?
In its petition filed in the Supreme Court through advocate Sugandha Anand, the state justified its decision of shifting the Himachal Pradesh RERA office from Shimla to Dharamshala, saying it was taken to ‘decongest’ Shimla city, and it was purely on administrative considerations.
Senior advocate Madhavi Divan, appearing for the state, told the Supreme Court bench about the matter, “This is about the RERA, which we seek to shift to Dharamshala”.
An advocate, appearing for the respondent, said 90 per cent of the projects with which the authority (RERA) deals are in Shimla, Solan,
Parwanoo and Sirmaur districts, which are within a radius of a maximum of 40 km.
The advocate said around 92 per cent of complaints which are pending before RERA are only from these districts, and there are only 20 projects in Dharamshala.
The top court also observed that Shimla is ‘completely over exhausted’.
What did Supreme Court say in its order?
While issuing a notice on the plea, the Apex Court bench said, “The state is permitted to shift the office of RERA to the place of its choice.
However, it shall be subject to the final outcome of the writ petition pending before the High Court.”
The bench was also informed that the district judge, Shimla, hears the appeals against the orders passed by RERA.
“With a view to ensure that the persons affected by the orders of RERA are not caused any inconvenience to visit Shimla for the purpose of filing appeals, it is further directed that appellate power may be shifted from principal district judge, Shimla, to principal district judge of Dharamshala,” the bench said.
aniltikotekar4sme.com 