Skip to content
Master Your Money — Master Your Financial Future

Maharashtra's Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) instructed to reintroduce physical hearing options by the Bombay High Court

Court enforces decision, citing MahaRERA's continued insistence on virtual hearings despite the COVID-19 pandemic, with in-person party hearings still being denied.

,   and  Administrator
2 min read
High Court in Bombay orders Maharashtra RERA to reinstate the physical hearing option
High Court in Bombay orders Maharashtra RERA to reinstate the physical hearing option

Maharashtra's Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) instructed to reintroduce physical hearing options by the Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has issued a landmark judgment, directing the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) to restore hybrid hearing facilities within four weeks. The decision was made in response to a petition filed by Mumbai resident Mayur Desai, who argued that MahaRERA's current model of virtual-only hearings was frustrating the objectives of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

In the judgment, a Bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Neela Gokhale held that exclusive reliance on virtual hearings was unsustainable and that hybrid hearings are a constitutional imperative to ensure meaningful access to justice.

The key hybrid hearing guidelines and related procedural directions issued to MahaRERA are as follows:

  1. MahaRERA must restore the hybrid hearing model that was in place before the COVID-19 pandemic within four weeks (deadline 4th September 2025).
  2. Parties should be allowed to opt for either physical presence or virtual appearance at hearings without requiring conditional permissions.
  3. MahaRERA must review and revise Circular 34A dated April 8, 2025, and related Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), especially concerning:
  4. Mechanism for urgent listing of matters.
  5. Proper execution of non-compliance orders.
  6. Clear mentioning procedures.
  7. Time-stamped pronouncement and publication of orders.
  8. Assigning fixed hearing dates and clearly notifying adjournments with next dates.
  9. MahaRERA shall maintain a register of praecipes (requests) with recorded reasons for acceptance or rejection of listing requests.
  10. MahaRERA's website must transparently publish SOPs, contact information, Bench calendars, and cause lists for public access.
  11. Procedural frameworks must be aligned with the Sarvesh Mathur judgement to further ensure due process and transparency.

The Court emphasized that access to justice includes the right to physical hearing and cannot be replaced solely by virtual hearings, citing this as a constitutional right. The petition seeking this relief was allowed, and a stay on the judgment was denied, underscoring the Court’s intent for immediate compliance.

In conclusion, MahaRERA must promptly implement hybrid hearings (physical + virtual) with procedural reforms enhancing transparency, accessibility, and prompt execution of orders as mandated by the Bombay High Court’s judgment in Mayur L Desai’s case.

  1. Given the Bombay High Court's judgment, it is essential for MahaRERA to invest in financial resources and time to ensure the implementation of hybrid hearing formats, including both physical and virtual components, as a means to uphold the right to access justice.
  2. In light of the directive issued by the Bombay High Court, those interested in real-estate matters should closely monitor the progress made by MahaRERA towards the proper implementation of hybrid hearings, as such proceedings may significantly impact the efficiency and fairness of their future investments.

Read also:

    Related

    Latest