Back
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Y.R. Meena, Prem Shanker Asopa
Ashu Gupta - Appellant
Versus
The Presiding Officer, Rent Appellate Tribunal - Respondent
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 551 of 2005
Decided On : 08/01/2005
Revision - Appellate Rent Tribunal - The court held that revision is not maintainable when the provisions of the Act itself do not provide the remedy of revision. The matter was remitted back to the Single Judge to decide the writ petition on merits.
Fact of the Case:
The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, stating that writ is not maintainable and revision is the appropriate remedy. The appellant argued that revision is not maintainable and writ is the only remedy available. The respondents' counsel conceded that revision is not maintainable, citing the relevant clause of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court remitted the matter back to the Single Judge to decide the writ petition on merits. The stay was granted by the Single Judge, and the court directed the matter to be listed before the Single Judge for a decision on the stay application.
Issues: The main issue was the maintainability of the revision and the appropriate remedy available to the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that when the provisions of the Act itself do not provide the remedy of revision, the revision is not maintainable.
Final Decision: The appeal was disposed of accordingly, and the matter was remitted back to the Single Judge for a decision on the writ petition.
1. Learned Single Judge had dismissed the writ petition holding that writ is not maintainable and revision is an appropriate remedy, provided it falls within the ambit and scope of revisional jurisdiction.
2. Mr. Ranjan, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that revision is not maintainable and writ is the only remedy available to the appellant.
3. Mr. Kapoor, learned Counsel for the respondents has fairly conceded that revision is not maintainable and he also brought to our notice Clause (c) of Sub-section (11) of Section 19 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 wherein it is provided that against the decision of Appellate Rent Tribunal, no further appeal or revision shall lie. The relevant clause reads as under:-
“(c) The decision of the Appellate Rent Tribunal shall be final and no further appeal or revision shall lie against its order.”
4. When the provisions of Act itself does not provide the remedy of revision, the revision is not maintainable.
5. Mr. Kapoor submits that when the writ is the appropriate course in this case, the writ petition should be remitted back to learned Single Judge for decision on merits.
6. Considering the submissions of learned Counsel for both the parties, we remit the matter back to learned Single Judge to decide the writ petition on merits.
7. Mr. Ranjan, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that stay was granted by learned Single Judge, therefore, till the matter is taken up by learned Single Judge, the stay should be granted.
8. As the matter has been remitted back to learned Single Judge, list the petition before learned Single Judge on 02.08.2005 and let the learned Single Judge take decision on stay application.
9. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
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
