ANIL JAIN Vs. AMAR NATH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the orders of the Rent Controller, dated 10 -3 -1986 and 9 -9 -1986 whereby sanction has been given under Section 22 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, to the tenant for filling the complaint against the landlord.

(2.) THE landlords through their Mukhtiar -i -am Hem Chand filed an ejectment application on 13 -2 -1986. Therein certain arrears of rent were claimed along with house tax with effect from (Sic) -1 -19(Sic)0 to 31 -3 -1985 amounting to Rs. 393.75 P. The said house tax was paid by the tenant Later on, he represented that he has already paid house tax with effect from 1 -1 -1980 to 31 -3 -1982 that is Rs. 81/ - and therefore, the latter has charged the said amount twice and thereby violated the provisions of the Act. He, therefore, sought permission under Section 22 of the said Act for filing the necessary complaint against the landlords. The said permission was granted by the Rent Controller vide its order dated 10 -3 -1986. Subsequently, the complaint was filed and the five landlords who were arrayed as accused were summoned vide order dated 9 -5 -1986.

(3.) A preliminary objection was raised on behalf of Respondent -tenant that no petition under Article 227 of the Constitution was maintainable when the landlords had their remedy to file a revision petition against the order of the Rent Controller granting permission for filing a complaint. Strong reliance was placed on Mohd. Yunus v. Mohd. Mustaqin : A.I.R. 1984 S.C. 38.