The state government of Gujarat has once again faced criticism from the Gujarat High Court for its failure to appoint members and a chairperson for the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) and its appellate tribunal. In response to the government’s assurance that the vacancies would be filled promptly, the court demanded an explanation for the officials’ inaction. Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal expressed her disappointment, stating that these tribunals were created to alleviate the burden on the courts and emphasized that the government should not delay these appointments, as it leaves the people of Gujarat without a remedy.

The court is currently reviewing two Public Interest Litigations (PILs) that call for the appointment of RERA members and a chairperson for the appellate tribunal. While the chairperson for RERA has been appointed by the state government, there are still two vacant positions for members. Similarly, the positions of chairperson and one member of the RERA appellate tribunal have been vacant for the past three years. In 2021, the state government had assured the High Court that these positions would be filled immediately. However, with the vacancies remaining and the government repeatedly assuring the court that it would initiate the appointment process, the judges expressed their frustration during a hearing last week, refusing to grant any further time.

During the hearing on Monday, the judges instructed the government law officer to inform the government about the urgency of completing the appointment process. Despite the High Court setting a deadline, the government has failed to take any action for the past three years.

Regarding the appointment of RERA members, the High Court was assured that these appointments would be made by next week. On the matter of the RERA appellate tribunal, Advocate General Kamal Trivedi submitted that a retired high court judge would be appointed as the chairperson, requiring consultation with the Chief Justice. It was further mentioned that the government would provide the name of the retired judge by the evening. The High Court scheduled a further hearing on the matter for September 5.