SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(All) 878

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
G.P. MATHUR, J.
U.P. State Electricity Board - Appellant
Versus
VII Additional District And Sessions Judge And Others - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 26594 of 1990
Decided On : 18-06-1992

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Rajesh Kumar.

The Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board is a public sector corporation owned and controlled by the State Government and, therefore, comes within the definition of the expression 'public sector corporation' as defined in Section 3(p) of the Uttar Pradesh Act No. 13 of 1972 (Rent Act).

Headnote:

RENT CONTROL - UTTAR PRADESH ACT NO. 13 OF 1972 - SECTION 3(P) - PUBLIC SECTOR CORPORATION - UTTAR PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD - MAINTAINABILITY OF APPLICATION FOR ENHANCEMENT OF RENT - INTERPRETATION OF STATUTORY PROVISIONS.

Fact of the Case:

Landlord filed an application under Section 21(8) of the Uttar Pradesh Act No. 13 of 1972 (Rent Act) for enhancement of rent of premises let out to the Petitioners. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer and the Additional District Judge dismissed the Petitioners' appeal. The Petitioners challenged the maintainability of the application and the correctness of the market value of the building assessed by the authorities.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the application for enhancement of rent was maintainable as the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board was a public sector corporation owned and controlled by the State Government and, therefore, came within the definition of the expression 'public sector corporation' as defined in Section 3(p) of the Rent Act. The court also found that the finding of the authorities below on the market value of the building was a finding of fact based on appreciation of evidence and did not suffer from any error of law.

Issues: 1. Whether the application for enhancement of rent was maintainable? 2. Whether the market value of the building assessed by the authorities was correct?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted Section 3(p) of the Rent Act and held that the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board was a public sector corporation owned and controlled by the State Government and, therefore, came within the definition of the expression 'public sector corporation'. 2. The court held that the finding of the authorities below on the market value of the building was a finding of fact based on appreciation of evidence and did not suffer from any error of law.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

G.P. Mathur, J.

Parties have exchanged affidavits and therefore, the writ petition is being disposed of finally at the admission stage.

2. Smt. Bishambhari Devi, landlord Respondent No. 3, filed an application u/s 21(8) of Uttar Pradesh Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Chairman, Uttar Pradesh Electricity Board, and Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division (I), Saharanpur, for enhancement of rent of premises bearing No. 2/2419 Gill colony, Saharanpur, which is under the tenancy of the Petitioners. The case of the landlord, in brief was that the premises in dispute were let out to the Petitioners on a monthly rent of Rs. 2500/- per month on the basis of an agreement dated 8-9-1982; that in view of the extent and location of the premises the rent being paid by the Petitioners was inadequate and that the same deserved to be enhanced to Rs. 4772.50. The application was contested by the Petitioners on various grounds. The Rent Control & Eviction officer after consideration of evidence on record held that the rent of the premises should be Rs. 4551/- per month and further directed that the landlord would be entitled to rent at the said rate with effect from the date of application moved by her, i.e. 1-3-1988. The appeal preferred by the Petitioners was also dismissed by the 7th Addl. District Judge, Sharanpur on 16-7-1990.

3. Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, has submitted that the application moved by the landlord u/s 21(8) of the Act was not maintainable as the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board was not State Government or local authority or public sector Corporation or a recognised educational institution. Sri V.K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the Respondent, has submitted that the Electricity Board is a public sector corporation and, therefore, the application is maintainable.

4. Section 3(p) of Uttar Pradesh Act No. 13 of 1972 reads as follows:

Public sector Corporation means any corporation owned or controlled by the Government, including any company, as defined in Section 3 of the Companies Act, 1956, in which not less than fifty percent of the paid up share capital is held by the Government.

U.P. State electricity Board has been constituted by the state Government In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 5 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Electricity Act) Section 12 of the Act provides that the board shall be a body corporate by the name notified under Sub-section (1) of Section 5, having perpetual succession and a seal with power to acquire and hold property both movable and immovable and shall by the said name sue and be sued. Section 12-A provides that the State Government may direct that the Board shall be a body corporate with such capital as may be fixed by the Government. Thus the State Electricity Board Is constituted and its capital is fixed by the State Government. Section 8 provides that the Chairman and other members of the Board shall hold office for such period as may be prescribed and Section 10 provides that the State Government may suspend from office or may remove any member of the Board on the grounds enumerated therein. Section 15 provides that the appointment of the secretary of the Board shall be subject to approval of the State Government. Section 59 provides that the Board shall after taking credit for any sub-version from the State Government u/s 63, carry on its operation under the Act and adjust its tariffs. Section 61 provides that in February of each year the Board shall submit to the State Government a statement in the prescribed form of the assessed capital and revenue receipts and the expenditure for the ensuing year and the State Government shall after receipt of the said statement cause it to be laid on the table of both the houses of Legislature and further the Board shall take into consideration any comments made on the said statement in the State legislature. Section 60 provid


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top