9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 4 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949.
Summary: The appellant filed a Writ Petition before the High Court challenging the constitutional validity of Section 4 of the Act, which determines fair rent based on 1938 rates. The High Court dismissed the petition due to lack of essential facts. The appellant contended that pegging rent to 1938 rates was unreasonable given the rise in prices. However, the Court noted that each state legislature has the authority to determine fair rent methods, and legislative wisdom is not a ground for challenging validity. Article 14 does not allow comparison between laws of different states. The Court also highlighted that the Act was passed in 1949 and pegging rent to 1938 rates was not per se unreasonable. The challenge to Section 4 was rejected, and the appeal was dismissed. In conclusion, the Court upheld the constitutionality of Section 4 of the Act, ruling that the method of determining fair rent based on 1938 rates was not arbitrary or violative of constitutional rights. The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
|
