MAHENDRA RAJ Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this writ petition is to the vires of section 14-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act which was incorporated in the Act by way of amendment in the year 1988.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are that the petitioner is a tenant of a residential premises under respondent No. 3 who is the landlord. After the promulgation of the said section 14-B, respondent No. 3, who had earlier filed an application for eviction of the petitioner under Section 14(1) (e) (b) (c) (d) (h) (i) (j) and (k) moved a fresh petition under Section 14-B of the Act. His contention, interalia, was that while he was in service the premises had been let out to the petitioner and that the landlord had retired from Army Service and he required the premises in question for his own residence. It is also stated that after his retirement in the year 1982, having served for 28 years in the Army, he had worked for about two years and finally was not holding any job after 1982.

(3.) VIDE order dated 2nd September, 1989, the application for leave to contest was dismissed and an order for eviction was passed in favour of the landlord and against the petitioner. It is only this order which is challenged before us in the present writ petition.