2019 Supreme(SC) 1343

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ARUN MISHRA, INDIRA BANERJEE, VINEET SARAN, M.R. SHAH, S. RAVINDRA BHAT, JJ.
Rajendra Diwan – Appellant
versus
Pradeep Kumar Ranibala & Anr. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3613 OF 2016 WITH CA. NO. 10214 OF 2016 AND C.A. NO. 3051 OF 2017
Decided On : 10-12-2019

IMPORTANT POINTS
Section 13(2) of the Rent Control Act is ultra vires the Constitution of India, null and void and of no effect.
There is no provision providing for direct appeal to the Supreme Court, from an order of a Tribunal constituted under any law enacted by a State Legislature.
Providing for direct appeal to Supreme Court from orders of Tribunal is not ancillary or incidental to power of State Legislature to enact a Rent Control Act.
State Legislature is expressly barred from conferring appellate jurisdiction to the Supreme Court from orders passed by Appellate Rent Control Tribunal, constituted under a state law.
Power of Supreme Court under Article 136 should not be confused with appellate power ordinarily exercised by appellate courts and Tribunals under specific statutes.
Conclusiveness or finality given by a statute to decision of a Court or Tribunal cannot deter Supreme Court from exercising this jurisdiction under Article 136.
State statute not providing for appeal to High Court cannot be invalidated on this ground.
Presidential assent will not validate legislative incompetency.

Headnote:

(a) Constitution of India - Articles 124 and 131 to 145 - There is no provision providing for direct appeal to the Supreme Court, from an order of a Tribunal constituted under any law enacted by a State Legislature. (Para 40)

(b) Constitution of India - Seventh Schedule, Entry 18, List II r/w Article 323B and Articles 245 and 246 - State legislature competent to enact law to provide for adjudication and trial of all disputes, complaints and offences relating to tenancy and rent, by a Tribunal. (Para 46)

(c) Constitutional law - Legislative competence - Entry 18, List III, Seventh Schedule, Constitution of India - Section 13(2), Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011 - Legislative power conferred by an Entry is to extend to all ancillary matter - Section 13(2) providing for direct appeal to Supreme Court from orders of Tribunal - Not ancillary or incidental to power of Chhattisgarh State Legislature to enact a Rent Control Act. (Para 48, 49)

(d) Constitution of India - Article 245 - Source of legislative power - State laws cannot have extra territorial operation - Section 13(2), Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011 enacted by Chhattisgarh State Legislature affecting jurisdiction of the Supreme Court - Without legislative competence. (Para 51)

(e) Constitution of India - Seventh Schedule, Entry 18, List II - Power to enact State laws regulating landlord tenant relationship, collection of rents etc - Does not enable State legislature to circumvent Entry 64, State List or Entry 46, Concurrent List which enable State Legislature to enact laws with respect to the jurisdiction and powers of Courts, except the Supreme Court; or to render otiose Entry 77, Union List, which expressly confers law making power in respect of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, exclusively to Parliament - State Legislature is expressly barred from conferring appellate jurisdiction to the Supreme Court from orders passed by Appellate Rent Control Tribunal, constituted under a state law. (Para 52, 53, 54)

(f) Constitution of India - Article 323B - State Legislature cannot expand jurisdiction of Supreme Court by enacting a provision for further statutory appeal to the Supreme Court from an order of an Appellate Tribunal. (Para 55, 78)

(g) Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011 - Section 13(2) - Providing for direct appeal to Supreme Court from orders of Rent Control Appellate Tribunal - Contention that the provision is only ancillary to Article 136, constitution of India unsustainable. (Para 56)

(h) Constitution of India - Article 136 - Supreme Court does not act as a regular court of appeal - Article 136 confers discretionary power on the Supreme Court to interfere in appropriate cases - Power of Supreme Court under Article 136 should not be confused with appellate power ordinarily exercised by appellate courts and Tribunals under specific statutes. (Para 57, 58)

(i) Constitution of India - Article 136 - Ordinarily appellate jurisdiction is not exercised when a statute gives finality to a decision of the Court or Tribunal - But conclusiveness or finality given by a statute to decision of a Court or Tribunal, cannot deter Supreme Court from exercising this jurisdiction under Article 136. (Para 59)

(j) Constitution of India - Seventh Schedule - Entry 65, State List r/w Entry 46, Concurrent List - State competent to enact law affecting jurisdiction and powers of High Court, except those under Articles 226 and 227 - State Legislature also not competent to enact law with respect to jurisdiction and powers of Supreme Court. (Para 66, 73)

(k) Constitution - Proviso to Article 200 - Section 13(2) of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011 - Not providing for appeal to High Court - Does not derogate from any power of the High Court - Cannot be invalidated on this ground. (Para 69)

(l) Constitutional law - Validity of statute - Presidential assent - Will not validate legislative incompetency. (Para 76)

(m) Constitutional law - Validity of statute - Presidential assent - Reservation of a Bill for Presidential assent and consequential grant of Presidential assent - Does not tantamount to special agreement between the Government of India and the State Government - Article 138(2) is not attracted. (Para 81, 83)

Facts of the case:

The question arising in this case is whether Section 13(2) of the Rent Control Act is ultra vires the Constitution of India, by reason of lack of legislative competence of the Chhattisgarh State legislature to enact the provision.

Finding of the Court:

Section 13(2) of the Rent Control Act is ultra vires the Constitution of India, null and void and of no effect.