EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Vs. MADAN GULATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question involved in this revision is that "if the landlord has retired as the employee of the UT, Chandigarh and has property in the State of Haryana in occupation of a tenant, could he get it vacated in terms of Section 13-A(1-A) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 being a Central Government employee?" This revision petition is filed by the tenant against the order of the Rent Controller, Panchkula dated 16.11.2011 by which application of the tenant seeking leave to defend was dismissed on the ground of delay.

(2.) In brief, the landlords filed eviction petition under Section 13-A(1-A) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 (for short 'the Act') alleging therein that they had let out their triple storey house No. 1018, Sector 9, Panchkula vide lease deed dated 31.10.2003 @ Rs. 15,000/- per month. The landlord/respondent No. 1 has retired as Deputy Director, Ayurveda, Chandigarh Administration by taking voluntary retirement on 31.1.2009, land lady /respondent No. 2 has retired as Sr. Ayurdedic Physician on 31.8.2009 on attaining the age of superannuation and both are in need of the demised premises for their residence and opening a clinic as they have no other accommodation in the urban area of Panchkula. The tenants filed application for leave to defend which was allowed on 14.5.2010. They filed written statement, issues were accordingly framed on 11.6.2010 and the case was posted for evidence of the landlords. However, the land- lords filed a Civil Revision in the High Court against the order dated 14.5.2010 whereby-leave to defend was granted and the said CR No. 4148 of 2010 was allowed on 13.10.2011 on the ground that leave to defend was filed beyond the statutory period of 15 days. After the order dated 14.5.2010 was set aside by the High Court, Rent Controller passed the order of eviction.

(3.) In the present revision petition, the only argument raised by the tenants is that the landlords have retired from Chandigarh Administration and are thus not covered under Section 13-A(1-A) of the Act as it applies to the employees of the Government of India, Government of Haryana or Government of State owned Board or Corporation of Haryana and not the retirees from UT Chandigarh.