The act of granting exemption under S.25(1) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 is a legislative act and need not be accompanied by a disclosure of reasons. The court also emphasized the limited scope for judicial review of the reasons urged by the Government in support of such notifications.

Headnote:
Exemption - Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 - S.25(1)
Fact of the Case:

The appeals challenged the validity of a notification exempting buildings in Devaswom lands from the provisions of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The notification was attacked on the ground of lacking public interest or sufficient cause for exemption.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the act of granting exemption under S.25(1) is a legislative act and need not be accompanied by a disclosure of reasons. The court also emphasized the limited scope for judicial review of the reasons urged by the Government in support of such notifications.
Issues: Validity of the notification under S.25(1) of the Act, disclosure of reasons, sustainability of reasons, contemporaneous disclosure of reasons, and delay and laches in challenging the notification.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that the act of granting exemption under S.25(1) is a legislative act and need not be accompanied by a disclosure of reasons. It also emphasized the limited scope for judicial review of the reasons urged by the Government in support of such notifications.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeals and set aside the judgment of the learned judge, directing that the writ petitions will stand dismissed.

Judgment :-

1. These appeals by the State and by the Cochin Devaswom Board (referred to as the Board) should be allowed and the judgment of the learned judge set aside. W. A. Nos. 199 and 201 of 1977 are by the State and by (he Board respectively, against the decision of a learned judge in O. P. No. 2392 of 1973; and W. A No 246 of 1977 is by the Board against the judgment of the same learned judge in O. P. No. 1025 of 1975. The writ petitions challenged the validity of Ext. P1 notification dated 17 111966 issued under S.25 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 exempting the buildings in Devaswom lands in East Pallithanam (Trichur), constructed by the Cochin Devaswom Board or out of its funds, from all the provisions of the said Act. Ext. P3 is a copy of the Memorandum by the inmates of the Devaswom buildings in East Pallithanam to the Minister for Revenue. This was supplemented by Exts. P5 and P7. The memorandum was rejected by Ext. P8 dated 22 51973. Against that a further revision Ext. P9 was filed which was rejected by Ext. P10. The writ petition was to quash Exts. P1, P8 and P10.

2.. S.25(1) of the Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, reads:

"25. Exemptions: (I) 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 this Act."

And Ext. P1 notification, which is impugned, is as follows:

"PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (BUILDINGS)

Notification No. 44929/B-2/66/PW

dated, Trivandrum, 17th November '66

In exercise of the powers conferred by S.25 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. (Act 2 of 1965) the Government of Kerala hereby exempt the buildings in the Devaswom Lands in Eastern Pallithanam (Trichur) constructed by the Cochin Devaswom Board out of its funds, from all the provisions of the said Act.

By order of the Governor P.U. John, Deputy Secretary"

The notification was attacked on the ground that it did not either allege or disclose any public interest, nor, any reasons for the exemption; and that such reasons as were later given by the Government in support of the notification, were manifestly unsustainable and wrong. In Para.7 of the additional Counter Affidavit dated 213 1975, the Government disclosed the reasons for the exemption as follows:

7. The 2nd respondent has built a few houses in Eastern Pallithanam belonging to the'Vadakkunnatha' temple of the Devaswom Board in Trichur Town with its own funds. These bouses were constructed with a view to protect the flower gardens and for residential purpose of Devaswom employees. These houses have been allotted to some of the Devaswom employees and other devout Hindus who according to the Board would not do anything affecting the sanctity of the area. If the provisions of the Kerala Buildings Lease and Rent Control Act are made applicable to the buildings in Pallithanam by allotment of the buildings under the provisions of the said Act they may go to non-Hindus and thereby the sacred precincts of the Vadakkunnatha temple and its sanctity may be affected and the sentiment of the Hindu Public will be wounded. In effect such a contingency may go against the spirit of the provisions of the Hindu Religious Institution Act because the funds and property of Hindu Temples are to be used for the benefit and betterment of the Hindu Community. Above all the Travancore Devaswom Board has been exempted from the provisions of Act 2 of 1965".

This was traversed in the Reply Affidavit dated 22 61975 of the petitioner, in Para.3 of which, it was stated that there was no flower garden at all maintained by the Devaswom in the Colony of Eastern Pallithanam houses; that the Flower Gardens referred to in the counter affidavit might be the gardens in Thekkinkad Maidan known as the Children's Park maintained by the Trichur Municipality and not by the Board; that the same was nearly 400 yards aw

Click Here to Read the rest of this document