Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.D. TULZAPURKAR, R.S. PATHAK AND SABYASACHI MUKHARJI.JJ.
S. Kandaswamy Chettiar, Petitioner
Versus
State of T.N. and another, Respondents.
Advocates appeared
W.P. Nos. 4433, 4642-57, 1978, 337-339, 757-758, 943, 281, 291 and 1351 of 1979, 4103 and 6271 of 1980, 731 and 1943 of 1981, 8274 and 9879 of 1983 and C.A. Nos. 3108-3109 of 1981 with W.P. Nos. 7941 and 7883 of 1981, D/- 12-12-1984.
Tamil Nadu Buildings Act, 1900 - Section 29 - Tamil Nadu Act, 1960 - Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 14 - Madras Act, 1949 - Section 13 - Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act 1961 – Section 3(2), 3, 3-A, 4 to 8, 10 and 14 to 16, 10(1), 1(2)(c), S. 10(3)(a)(i), (ii) and (iii) - Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Jagirdars Debt Reduction Act, 1937 - Section 2(e) - Public Trusts - Charitable Trusts - Challenged Legality - Petitioners and appellants, who are tenants of several buildings belonging to Hindu, Christian, and Muslim religious public trusts as also to public charitable trusts in State of Tamil Nadu, have challenged legality and / or validity of total exemption granted to all such buildings in exercise of powers conferred upon State Govt - Whether this particular exercise of power conforms to such guidance or not and therefore, it will be useful to advert briefly to guidance so afforded - Whether, in specific cases of need exceptions may he made without subverting general purposes of ordinance - Whether in issuing Notification State Government has exercised power in conformity with such guidance and same is valid as not offending - Whether respondents particularly State Government have furnished proper material on basis of which exmption granted can be justified - Whether said classification has any nexus with object with which power to grant exemptions – Held, State Government on material before it came to conclusion that fair rent fixed under Act was unjust in case of such buildings and it was necessary to permit trustees of such buildings to recover from their tenants reasonable market rent and if that be so now eviction when reasonable market rent is not paid would be unreasonable and if market rent, is paid by tenants no trustee is going to evict them - It is thereforeclear that granting total exemption cannot be regarded as excessive or unwarranted - Apart from this aspect of matter it is conceivable that trustees of buildings belonging to such public religious institutions or public charities may desire eviction of their tenants for purpose of carrying out major or substantial repairs or for purpose of demolition and reconstruction and State Government may, have felt that trustees of such buildings should be able to effect evictions without being required to fulfil other onerous conditions which must be complied with by private landlords when they seek evictions for such purposes - In court view, therefore, total exemption granted to such buildings under, impugned notification is perfectly justified - If State of Madras has thought fit to grant exemption in a particular manner by impugned notification it will be difficult to find fault with it if exemption so granted is not illegal or unconstitutional - It will be interesting to note that even under Saurashtra Notification term or condition contained in schedule A thereto also makes position clear that eviction may follow if permitted enhanced rent is not paid or allowed to fall in arrears for two consecutive months by tenant of such buildings belonging to public religious or charitable trusts – Appeal Dismissed.
Judgment
TULZAPURKAR, J.:- In these writ petitions and civil appeals by special leave the petitioners and appellants, who are tenants of several buildings belonging to the Hindu, Christian, and Muslim religious public trusts as also to public charitable trusts in the State of Tamil Nadu, have challenged the legality and / or validity of the total exemption granted to all such buildings from all the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1900 (Tamil Act US of 1960) (for short the Act) in exercise of the powers conferred upon the State Govt. under S. 29 of the Act.
2. Section 29 of the Act runs thus :
"29. Exemptions. - Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Government may, subject to such condition as they deem fit, by notification exempt any building or class of buildings from all or any of the provisions of this Act."
It appears that initially by G. O. Ms. No. 1998 (Home) dated 12th August, 1974, the State Government had, in exercise of its powers under S. 29 exempted all the buildings owned by the Hindu, Christian and Muslim religious trusts and charitable institutions from all the provisions of the Act; in other words the exemption was available to buildings of private religious trusts as also private charitable trusts. But later on by a fresh G. O. Ms. No. 2000 (Home) dated 16th August, 1976, the State Government in supersession of the earlier Notification dated 12th August 1974, confined the exemption to all buildings owned by the. Hindu, Christian and Muslim religious public trusts and public charitable trusts. The relevant Notification which is being impugned herein runs thus :
"G. O. Ms. No. 2000, Home, 16th August, 1976 No. II(2)/HO/4520/76.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 29 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1900 (Tamil Nadu Act 18 of 1960), and in supersession of the Home Department Notification No. II(2)/HO/3811/74, dated the 12th August, 1974, published at page 444 of Part II Section 2 of the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, dated the 12th August. 1974, the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby exempts all the buildings owned by the Hindu, Christian and Muslim religious public trusts and public charitable trusts from all the provisions of the said Act."
3. The tenants have challenged the aforesaid Notification granting total exemption to all buildings belonging to the Hindu, Christian and Muslim religious public trusts and public charitable trusts from all the provisions of the Act on three grounds (a) that S. 29 of the Act suffers from the vice of excessive delegation of legislative powers inasmuch as it vests in the State Government unguided and uncontrolled discretion in the matter of granting exemptions and is therefore, violative of Art. 14 of the Constitutio, (b) that the Notification dated 16th August, 1976 deprives the tenants of all such buildings (buildings belonging to Hindu, Christian and Muslim religious public trusts and public charitable trusts) of the equal protection of the beneficial provisions of the Act which is available to the tenants of other buildings and as such the same is discriminatory offending against the equal protection clause of Art 14 and (c) that in any event the total exemption from all the provisions of the Act granted to such buildings where partial exemption would have sufficed, is excessive, unwarranted and unsupportable.
4. On the other hand, the State Govt. and the respondent landlords have refuted all the grounds on which the exmption has been challenged. It is denied that unguided and uncontrolled discretion has been conferred upon the State Govt. by S. 29 of the Act and it is contended that enough guidance is afforded by the Preamble and the operative provisions of the Act for the exercise of the discretionary power vested in the State Govt. It is pointed out that in P. J. Irani v. State of Madras 1962 (2) SCR 169 an identical provision contained in the earlier enactment namely, the Madras Buildings (Leas
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
