SAID UD DIN Vs. MAHABIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can the High Court. acting under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution review a finding of fact by a quasi-judicial Tribunal ? If so, what types of findings of fact and on what grounds? What is the legal theory of such judicial review ? These are some of the interesting questions raised by the otherwise simple facts of this case.

(2.) The petitioner is the tenant of house No. 1255, Gali Jaman Weli, Kalan Mahal, Delhi, situated in a slum area of which the respondents 2 to 5 are the landlords. The landlords obtained an order for the eviction of the tenant from the above premises under the Delhi Bent Control Act, 1958. In view of section 19(1) (b) of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act 1956 (hereinafter called the Act) however such an order of eviction could not be executed by the landlords except with the previous permission in writing of the competent authority under the Act. The landlords, therefore, applied under section 19(3) of Act to the competent authority for such permission. The decision of the application by the competent authority had to be governed by the statutory standard laid down in section 19(4) (a) which is, therefore, reproduced below :-

(3.) The case of the lanclords was that the tenant was in possession of means to obtain alternative accommodation. His own monthly income was Rs, 100.00 but his sons and grandsons lived and messed with him and thus constituted one family. The total income of all the members of the family was not less than Rs. 1500.00 per month.