JUDGMENT

M.S.SONAK,J. - Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The learned Counsel for the parties agree that a common judgment and order can dispose of these three petitions since they raise substantially common issues of Law.

3. In all these petitions, the principal challenge is to the provision in Sec. 23 of the Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 (Rent Control Act) to the extent the said provision prohibits landlords from securing eviction of their tenants from nonresidential buildings on the ground of bonafide need for personal occupation.

4. The Petitioner, in Writ Petition No.377 of 2019, has urged the striking down of the entire Rent Control Act or in the alternate Ss. 12 to 16, 18, 21, 22, 33 and Sec. 2(p) of the Rent Control Act, in addition to the challenge to Sec. 23 of the Rent Control Act. However, in our Judgment, the challenges to the entire Rent Control Act or the provisions other than Sec. 23 of the Rent Control Act are presently academic. Therefore, we propose only to consider the issue of the constitutional validity of Sec. 23 of the Rent Control Act and not the other challenges left open for examination in appropriate cases.

5. In Writ Peti