9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the revisional order passed by the State Government under Section 7-F of the Uttar Pradesh (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947. 2. Whether the State Government was required to hear the respondents before passing the revisional order. 3. Nature and character of the proceedings under Section 7-F of the Act. Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of the Revisional Order Passed by the State Government Under Section 7-F: The primary issue in this appeal is whether the revisional order passed by the State Government under Section 7-F of the Uttar Pradesh (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947, is invalid due to the lack of a hearing for the respondents, Ram Chand and Kailash Chand. The respondents were the tenants of the premises in question and were affected by the order. The trial court had initially found in favor of the appellants, granting them permission to sue the respondents in ejectment. This decision was upheld by the First Additional Civil Judge, Agra. However, the Allahabad High Court, in a second appeal, held that the State Government's order was invalid as it did not provide an opportunity for the respondents to be heard, thus violating the principles of natural justice. 2. Requirement to Hear the Respondents Before Passing the Revisional Order: The Allahabad High Court's decision was based on the principle that the State Government, in exercising its authority under Section 7-F, must act in a quasi-judicial manner. This requires adherence to the principles of natural justice, which include giving the affected parties an opportunity to present their case. The court emphasized that the State Government's failure to do so rendered the order invalid. The Supreme Court examined whether the proceedings before the State Government under Section 7-F are administrative or quasi-judicial. It concluded that the nature of the power conferred on the State Government by Section 7-F necessitates a quasi-judicial approach, requiring the principles of natural justice to be followed. 3. Nature and Character of the Proceedings Under Section 7-F: The Supreme Court analyzed the scheme of the Act and the nature of the power and jurisdiction conferred on the State Government by Section 7-F. The Act aims to protect tenants from eviction and regulates the conditions under which landlords can seek eviction. Section 3 of the Act specifies the grounds on which eviction can be sought, and the District Magistrate's permission is required for eviction not covered by these grounds. The court noted that the District Magistrate's decision affects the statutory rights of tenants, and the Commissioner, in revising the District Magistrate's order, must act in a quasi-judicial manner. This implies that the principles of natural justice must be followed at both levels. The court further held that the State Government, in exercising its revisional jurisdiction under Section 7-F, must also follow the principles of natural justice. The power to call for the record suo motu does not exempt the State Government from providing a fair hearing to both parties. The Supreme Court disagreed with the earlier decisions of the Allahabad High Court, which had held that the functions under Section 3(2) and Section 3(3) were administrative. The court emphasized that the nature of the power and the statutory rights involved necessitate a quasi-judicial approach. The court also criticized the learned single Judge of the Allahabad High Court for re-examining the question himself, instead of referring the matter to a Division Bench or a larger Bench, as required by judicial propriety and decorum. Conclusion: The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Allahabad High Court, affirming that the revisional order passed by the State Government under Section 7-F without giving an opportunity to the respondents to be heard was invalid. The appeal was dismissed, and no order as to costs was made. Keywords: - Revisional Order - Section 7-F - Uttar Pradesh (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 - Principles of Natural Justice - Quasi-Judicial - District Magistrate - Commissioner - Statutory Rights - Judicial Propriety - Appeal Dismissed
|
