news details |
|
|
| DB admits PILs challenging J&K Residential & Commercial Tenancy Act 2012 | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Dec 17(JNF): A Division Bench of the State High Court comprising Chief Justice MM Kumar and Justice Hasnain Massodi admitted two Public Interest Litigations challenging the J&K Residential & Commercial Tenancy Act 2012.
In the PIL, it has been submitted that the respondents have taken away the powers and functions of judiciary and have vested them with the Revenue Officers. In the PIL it has been further submitted that the taking away of powers of adjudication land-lord tenant disputes from judiciary does not qualify the touch stone of Legislative Competence keeping in view the provisions of Section 12 and 18 of constitution of J&K. The provisions of section 2(b) and 2 (n) r/w section 29 of the Act that define the Rent Controller are a direct hit at the independence of the judiciary. A system that had been working actively for the pass so many decades has been snubbed by the state, which, it seems is relying more on the class of Revenue Officers, it has, instead of the time tested adjudication of the judiciary. It is further stated that by enacting the provisions impugned the superintendence and control of the High Court over the Rent Controller has been taken away in as much as the rent controller under the new act of 2012 is not amenable to the appellate or revisional jurisdiction of the High Court. This peoples' friendly order written by Chief Justice MM Kumar after hearing Sr. Adv BS Salathia, Advs Pawan Kumar Manni, Vikram Sharma and BL Kalgotra appearing for the PIL whereas Sr. AAG Gagan Basotra appeared for the state whereas Sr. Adv AV Gupta assisted by Aditya Gupta appearing for the respondents, observed that validity of the Jammu and Kashmir Residential and Commercial Tenancy Act, 2012 is under challenged in the present proceedings. The earlier impugned act has repealed the J&K Houses and Shops Rent Control Act, 1966. The mechanism under 1966 Act was entirely different than the one postulated by the impugned legislation. The matter requires consideration at length particularly in the light of the judgment of Apex Court. Accordingly, a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.09.2012 has stayed the operation of the provisions of the Act and the matter is pending consideration. The State has not sought modification of that order dated September 12, 2012.
The withdrawal of earlier suits or appeals would be deemed to be restored on the board of the Court of competent jurisdiction on filing of appropriate application by the party concerned. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
