J.V.GUPTA, J. - (1.) THIS petition is directed against the order of the Appellate Authority dated 5th September, 1985, whereby the Rent Controller was directed to submit a report to the effect as to what as the rent prevailing in the locality for similar buildings on the date of the presentation of the petition, i.e. 20th January, 1981.
(2.) THIS petition was admitted primarily on the ground that the vires of section 4 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, were challenged. Even on the last date of hearing, i.e. 10th February, 1986, notice was issued to the Advocate General, Haryana, for the same reason. At the time of arguments, it was brought to the notice of this Court on behalf of the landlord respondent that the tenant-petitioner had already moved the Supreme Court of India in CWP No. 12584/1985, dated 26th October,1985, and he, without disclosing this fact to this Court, had got this petition admitted. It was further contended that the vires of the said section could not be gone into by way of this petition as ruled by the Supreme Court in A.C. Estates v. Serajudin and Co., 1973 RCR 309: 1973 RCJ 341. Since this petition has arisen out of the proceedings of the Rent Controller under the Act, in view of the said dictum of the Supreme Court it could not be disputed that the vires of section 4 could not be challenged in this petition. Consequently, the revision petition in liable to the dismissed.
(3.) IT is surprising that the petitioner never brought the fact of filing the writ petition by him in the Supreme Court either to the notice of his counsel or this Court. Without disclosing the said fact he got further proceedings stayed before the Rent Controller. Thus, it appears that the conduct of the tenant-petitioner was not above board and he tried to over-reach the Court by concealing material facts. Consequently, the petition fails and is dismissed with costs. Costs assessed at Rs. 1,000/-.;