9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 1357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efs which have been sought, while invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32, as noted above, are in the following terms: "i. ...a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1 & 2 to cancel all the agreements with respondent no.5,6 & 7 and to ensure that all the projects in which money has been taken from the buyers their money is refunded or the same is constructed and handed over in a reasonable period of time; ii. ...a writ in the nature of Mandamus appointing a court receiver or form a committee headed by a retired judge of this Hon'ble Court along with other suitable persons from different fields to monitor / handle the projects of Respondent 6 & 7 in which money has been taken from the buyers; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt case. The petitioner also seeks a forensic audit, an investigation by CBI and by other authorities such as the Serious Fraud Investigation Office and Enforcement Directorate. 3 Mr Manoj V George, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that, in another project of the developer which is being implemented at Lucknow, notice was issued on a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution (Pawan Kumar Kushwaha and Ors. v Lucknow Development Authority and Ors. Writ Petition (Civil) No 1001 of 2020 ) on 20 November 2020 by a two-Judge Bench of this Court of which one of us was a member. On the above grounds, it has been submitted that it would be appropriate for this Court to issue notice and tag the writ petition under A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e remit and competence of the Court under Article 32. Managing a construction project is not within the jurisdiction of the court. 5. Several provisions of law confer statutory rights on purchasers of real estate and invest them with remedies enforceable at law. These include the Consumer Protection Act 1986, the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016. Parliament has enacted a statutory regime to protect the rights of purchasers of real estate and created fora which are entrusted with decision making authority. 6. A decision of a public authority which is entrusted with a public duty is amenable to judicial review. But it is quite another hypothesis to postulate that the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted and the premises are handed over within a reasonable time. The writ petition under Article 32 has been filed by a singular home buyer without seeking to represent the entire class of home buyers. The petition proceeds on the implicit assumption that the interest of all the buyers are identical. There is no basis to make such an assumption. All buyers may not seek a cancellation and refund of consideration. Apart from this aspect, the petitioner seeks other reliefs in aid of the primary relief, including the constitution of a Committee presided over by a former Judge of this Court for the purpose of handling the projects of the developer where moneys have been taken from home buyers. 6 Following the earlier view which has been taken on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re is reason for this Court not to entertain a petition directly under Article 32 in the present set of facts. Adequate remedies are available in terms of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. The statutory procedures which are enunciated have to be invoked. Adequate provisions have been made in the statute to deal with the filing of a complaint and for investigation in accordance with law. Judicial intervention is provided at appropriate stages by competent courts in that regard. In Devendra Dwivedi v. Union of India and Ors. Writ Petition (Criminal) 272 of 2020, a three-Judge Bench of this Court [of which one of us was a member] held that, determining "whether recourse to the jurisdiction under Article 32 be entertained in a particular cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rit Petition (C) No 940 of 2017); and (ii) Unitech matter (Bhupinder Singh v Unitech Ltd Civil Appeal No 10856 of 2016). Nothing contained in the present judgment will affect those proceedings or similar cases which have been monitored. In the present case, there is no reason to assume that the petitioner represents a class, apart from the other reasons set out earlier for declining intervention. Hence, on a considered view and for the reasons we have indicated above, we decline to entertain the petition under Article 32. However, in terms of the order dated 7 January 2021, we clarify that this will not come in the way of the petitioner espousing the remedies which are available to him under the relevant statutory provisions. 9 Subjec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
