Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)

Section: 13(2),13(vi)

(a) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)---S. 13 (2) (vi)-Expression "Controller may make an order"-Effect of word "may"-Extent of limit to discretion vested in Controller-Landlord seeking to eject tenant for purpose of demolishing building and raising new construction on same site All conditions laid down in S. 13(2) (vi) satisfied-Rent Controller cannot refuse ejectment on any extraneous or humanitarian ground-Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 6, Fundamental Rights Nos. 13, 14 & 15.   A Rent Controller, although satisfied that the landlord genuinely intended to demolish existing building for the purpose of constructing a new one on the same site nevertheless dismissed the application of the landlord under section 13 (2) (vi) of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 observing that the words "the Controller may make an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building" at the end of section 13(l.)(vi) of the Ordinance showed that the Controller has discretion to refuse prayer if it is not in the interest of justice. He refused ejectment saying "such an order would not only create hardship for so many persons, some of them being in occupation of the premises since the last 40 years and none less than 10 years, but would cause considerable dislocation of business and dismantling of machinery worth lacs of rupees resulting in huge losses to the owners; therefore the applicants are not entitled to seek ejectment of the opponents on this ground."   Against this order of the Rent Controller the landlord went in appeal before the appellate authority. The appellate authority disagreeing with the view of the Rent Controller on the word "may" occurring in section 13(2)(vi) of the Ordinance, accepted the appeal holding that since the conditions laid down in section 13 (2) (vi) had been satisfied by the landlord, the Rent Controller was not at liberty to refuse the application on extra neous considerations. In second appeal before the High Court it was urged by the tenants that the word "may", which occurs in sub section (2) of…