NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court stated on Thursday that it is time for all states to reevaluate the formation of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), which it claims is merely facilitating builders in default.
A panel comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi expressed that the individuals RERA was intended to assist are “completely depressed, disgusted, and disappointed,” suggesting they would not oppose the institution’s dissolution.
The remarks emerged as the bench allowed the Himachal Pradesh government to relocate the RERA office to its preferred location.
The court issued a notice regarding a petition filed by the Himachal Pradesh government, contesting an order from the Himachal Pradesh High Court concerning the office’s relocation from Shimla to Dharamshala. The high court had previously stayed a notification from June 2025 regarding the office’s move until further notice.
Subsequent to this, the high court reiterated its interim order on December 30, 2025.
The Supreme Court has stayed this high court directive.
“This institution does nothing besides aiding defaulted builders. We would not mind if it were abolished,” the Chief Justice remarked.
“It’s high time all states reconsider the establishment of this authority,” the bench added.
In its petition to the apex court, represented by advocate Sugandha Anand, the state argued that the decision to shift the RERA office from Shimla to Dharamshala aimed to “decongest” Shimla purely for administrative reasons.
Senior advocate Madhavi Divan, representing the state, informed the bench about the matter, stating, “This concerns the shifting of RERA to Dharamshala.”
A respondent’s advocate mentioned that 90% of the projects RERA oversees are in Shimla, Solan, Parwanoo, and Sirmaur, all within a maximum radius of 40 km.
He noted that around 92% of complaints pending with RERA are from these districts, with only 20 projects located in Dharamshala.
When informed that a retired IAS officer was appointed in RERA, the Chief Justice commented, “In every state, it has become a rehabilitation center. These authorities are filled with such individuals.”
“The people for whom this institution was created are utterly dissatisfied. They are not receiving any effective relief. You will understand the true situation when you meet them,” the Chief Justice stated.
The Supreme Court also observed that Shimla is “completely over-exhausted.”
In issuing the notice, the bench stated, “The state may relocate the RERA office as it sees fit, although this is subject to the final outcome of the writ petition currently pending before the high court.”
The advocate general of Himachal Pradesh informed the bench that, according to a policy decision, the state is developing Palampur, Dharamshala, and other cities.
The Chief Justice inquired, “What sense does it make to have a retired bureaucrat? How will they assist in developing Palampur? You need professionals who are environmentally conscious and familiar with areas like Palampur and Dharamshala.”
The bench was also updated that appeals against RERA’s orders are currently heard by the district judge in Shimla.
“To ensure that individuals affected by RERA’s orders do not face inconvenience traveling to Shimla for appeals, we direct that appellate authority be transferred from the principal district judge in Shimla to the principal district judge in Dharamshala,” the bench stated.
On February 9, in a separate matter, the apex court annulled an interim order from the Himachal Pradesh High Court which had halted the state’s decision to move the OBC commission from Shimla to Dharamshala.
The Supreme Court remarked that such matters pertain to policy decisions and typically do not belong in the judicial domain.
