Punjab and Haryana High Court stays notification extending Assam Tenancy Act to Chandigarh

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday stayed a notification by which Assam Tenancy Act, 2021, was extended to Union Territory of Chandigarh with certain modifications [Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association Regd. and another v Chandigarh Administration and others]..The notification has been challenged by Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association on the ground that the Assam Tenancy Act takes away adjudicatory powers from the judicial officers and grants them to the executive authority.The Union government’s jurisdiction to issue such a notification under Section 87 of the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966, has also been challenged. Considering Supreme Court’s latest judgment in Madras Bar Association v Union of India and another, a Division Bench of Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Deepak Manchanda said it needs examination whether the disputes regarding the tenancy and evictions can be decided by an executive authority.“The said issue also needs to be looked into to see whether the notification dated 06.05.2026 will stand the scrutiny of the settled principle of law so as to give jurisdiction for adjudication of the rent disputes to the Executive Authority,” the Bench said..The Court also noted that the Supreme Court in a 1989 case observed that powers under Section 87 of the Punjab Reorganization Act can be used to supplement existing laws in order to cover any gaps in them, but the same cannot result in the repeal of existing laws. The notification issued on May 6 repealed the East Punjab Urban Restriction Act, 1949 (law regulating rental agreements) in Chandigarh. Further, the Court noted that the infrastructure for the redressal of disputes under the notification was yet to be provided. Even the rules required to be framed under clause 13 of the notification have not seen the light of day, the Bench added. This left those with rent disputes unable to approach any forum for a remedy. “The effect of the same is that for the last three weeks, no one, who wants to avail any remedy qua the rent dispute, has been able to avail the remedy under notification dated 06.05.2026, as, 1949 Act stand repealed and notification dated 06.05.2026 lacks implementation due to nonavailability of infrastructure and non-framing of the rules so as to make operational 2021 Act which has been made applicable to U.T., Chandigarh,” the Court observed..The Court noted that under the East Punjab Urban Restriction Act, about 30-50 cases a day used to be filed. But due to the latest notification, no remedy has been available to the public for the redressal of their grievances for the past 21 days, it said.“General public is suffering as of now due to the lack of notifying of the rule so as to identify the authority which are to work under notification dated 06.05.2026,” the Court added. Considering the situation, the Court ordered that the notification dated May 6 would be kept in abeyance till the next date of hearing and East Punjab Urban Restriction Act, 1949, will remain in operation for adjudication of disputes. The matter will be heard next on July 14. However, the Court also clarified that its interim order will not restrict the authorities from creating infrastructure or framing the rules as required under the notification. .Senior Advocate Chetan Mittal with Advocates Shifali Goyal and Ritvik Garg appeared for the petitioners.Bar Association President Rohit Sud, Joint Secretary Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate Kamla Mahek and Executive Member Sumanjit Kaur also appeared in the matter.Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain, Senior Advocate Dheeraj Jain and Central Government Counsel Shreyansi Verma appeared for the Union government.Senior Standing Counsel Amit Jhanji with Additional Standing Counsel Abhinav Sood along with Advocates Eliza Gupta, Mehndi Singhal, Anmol Gupta, Sayyam Garg and Kudrit appeared for Chandigarh Administration. .[Read Order]