T.R. Ramachandran nair, J.

The petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P6 notification issued by the Government under Section 25 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short ‘the Act’). As per the said notification, the buildings of Gospel for Asia (the Second respondent herein) have been exempted from various provisions of the act.

2. The petitioners are the tenants of the second respondent. Both the petitioners are occupying different rooms, viz. X/271, X/269 and X/277 of Thiruvalla Municipality. They were inducted as tenants by Mr.Joseph Eapen, who sold it to one Mr. Mathai Syriac. The Second respondent purchased the building from the said Mr. Mathai Syriac. The second petitioner as plaintiff, had instituted O.S.No. 226/2003 before the Munisiff’s Court, Thiruvalla against any eviction by using force by the second respondent, he had also filed a petition under Section 13 (4) of the Act to the Accommodation Controller alleging deprivation of amenities by the second respondent. Subsequently, the petitioner were served with Exts.P4 and P5 notices by the landlord seeking vacant possession of the rooms. From the above notices, they came to know of the exemption granted to their buildings as per Ext.P6 and therefore the writ petition is filed challenging the same.

3. Ext.P6 is challenged on various grounds. It is averred in the writ petition that Ext.P6 has been issued without any application of mind, the affairs of the second respondent is fully controlled by the third respondent and his relatives and the second respondent is not a church and no public interest is involved in the matter. The contention therefore is that the exemption granted is in favour of an individual. It is further pointed out that there is clear hostile discrimination between the petitioners and other tenants and Ext.P6, if allowed to stand, will deprive them the protection allowed under the various provisions of the Act.

4. The Government as well as respondents 2 and 3 have filed counted affidavits supporting the legality of the notification. The relevant files have also been made available by the learned Govt. Pleader for our perusal.

For convenience, the notification Ext.P6 is extracted below:

“S.R.O. No.822/2003—in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (2 of 1965), the Government of Kerala hereby exempt in public interest the Buildings of Gospel for Asia From the provisions of section 4, 7, 11 and 13 of the said Act.”

The explanatory note shows that Government have decided in public interest, to exempt the buildings of Gospel for Asia from the provisions of Sections 4, 7, 11 and 13 of the Act.

5. The petitioners have filed a reply affidavit and an additional reply affidavit to dispute the averments in the counter affidavits filed by the respondents herein.

6. The notification is one issued under Section 25 of the Act. Section 25 confers the power to grant exemptions. Section 25 (1) provides that:-

“Notwithstanding anything contained in this act, the Government may, in public interest, or for any other sufficient cause, by notification in the Gazette, exempt any building or class of buildings from all or any of the provisions of the Act.”

7. We heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Bechu Kurian Thomas, learned Senior Advocate Shri S.V. Balakrishna Iyer, for respondents 2 and 3 and the learned Govt. Pleader Shri Lakshminarayanan. Learned counsel for the petitioners contented that the grant of exemption to the second respondent is a clear abuse of the power conferred under Section 25 (1) of the Act, on the Government. It is further pointed out that even though the second respondent claims to be a public religious trust, actually the same is founded by the third respondent and his family members and the formation of the trust is merely a camouflage and there is absolutely no public interest in the matter. Elaborating the