SC stays high court order on legality of completion cert issued to Pahala project

Bhubaneswar: Supreme Court stayed Orissa high court’s Dec 2025 judgment that set aside orders of the Odisha Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (OREAT) in a dispute involving a major real estate project, located in Pahala on the outskirts of the city, and its allottees.

The high court earlier ruled that the project in question was completed prior to the commencement of the Odisha Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), and therefore complaints filed by homebuyers were not maintainable. The completion was interpreted based on the completion certificate issued to the project in 2015. However, the apex court’s intervention now puts that ruling on hold, reviving uncertainty over the project’s regulatory status. The high court, in its common judgment delivered on Dec 22, 2025, sided with the promoter, holding that the project was completed in 2015 with a valid completion certificate and thus fell outside the ambit of RERA.


The SC distinguished between a completion certificate and an occupancy certificate, ruling that the absence of fire safety clearance or an occupancy certificate did not make the project ongoing. The top court’s stay order effectively suspended this interpretation, leaving the matter open for further adjudication.

Real estate experts and legal analysts acknowledged the implications of SC’s stay. “This stay is significant because it reopens the debate on whether completion certificates alone are sufficient to shield projects from RERA scrutiny,” real estate expert Bimalendu Pradhan said.

He added, “The high court took a promoter-friendly view, but Supreme Court seems inclined to examine whether consumer rights were compromised. The completion certificate is a document issued by an architect determining the completion of a project, but an occupancy certificate determines that the project is fit to occupy and stay.”

Rashmi Sahu, a property law specialist, said that the distinction between completion and occupancy certificates has always been contentious. “By staying the HC order, the apex court is signalling that procedural compliance, including fire safety and civic infrastructure, cannot be set aside when determining project completion,” she added.

In this case, the promoter contended that the Pahala project should be put outside RERA purview since the completion certificate was issued in 2015 before the Odisha Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, came into force (in May 2017). The project allottees, who filed the petition, however, argued that since the project applied for a revised layout in 2019 and lacks a fire safety certificate and an occupancy certificate, it should be considered ongoing.

“For developers, this stay introduces fresh uncertainty since many projects across Odisha were completed before May 2017 but lacked occupancy certificates. If the Supreme Court rules that such projects are still ongoing, it could expand RERA’s reach dramatically,” Pradhan added.