1. The instant writ petition has been addressed under Article 44 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution, 1974, whereby vires of the impugned orders dated 29.02.2024 and 14.12.2023 have been challenged.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterated the contents and grounds of writ petition already taken in the same has mainly stressed on the point that order passed by the learned SCJ/Rent Controller Mirpur dated 06.04.2024 whereby an application for spot inspection was rejected against the facts and law of the case which does not come in the definition of speaking order. He further added that the aforesaid impugned order was also concurred by the learned District Judge/Rent Appellate Authority vide the impugned order dated 29.02.2024, wrongly, hence, both the learned Courts below failed to appreciate the controversy in its true perspective, therefore, requested for admission of writ petition.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, gone through the contents of writ petition and the impugned decisions rendered by the Courts below with utmost care.
4. The parameters and compass of Section 44 of Interim Constitution, 1974, itself reveals that writ can only be issued where any sort of violation of any law/statutory rules or fundamental guaranteed rights are infringed. Although docrtrine of ubi jus ibiremedium envisages that where there is infringement of right there is a remedy but all sorts of grievances in bulk cannot be remedied in extra ordinary writ jurisdiction without adhering to the limits ordained by Article 44 of Interim Constitution, 1974 in this regard. Particularly as to embark upon the concurrent findings of two Judicial or Quasi Judicial forums, then there must have some cogent reasons for set at naught or reverse such findings.
5. It is pertinent to mention here that matters pertaining to rent issues are being governed by a special law on the subject i.e. "The Azad Jammu & Kashmir Rent Restriction Act, 1986." Although under Section 20 of the Act, certain provisions of CPC have been expressly made applicable regarding summoning and enforcing the attendance of witnesses by compelling their Production as are vested in a civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. Except these provisions no other provisions of the CPC including Order XXII of the same has been made applicable. Therefore, the Rent Controller has ample power to adapt any procedural mod regarding the lis pending before him as well as the appellate fora. Order passed by the Rent Controller and Appellate Authority could not be regarded as violation of law calling for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. In this regard ready reference is [1998 MLD SC (AJ&K) page 429] titled Muhammad Ilyas Afridi vs. Rent Controller and others & [1999 YLR SC (AJ&K) 275] titled MCB vs. Rent Controller and others.
6. The petitioner has invoked extra ordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court quo challenging decisions of the Rent Controller and learned Additional District Judge/Appellate Authority, Mirpur, that too, decision of the Appellate Authority has attained finality in view of the said law i.e. Rent Restriction Act, 1986.
7. Moreso, I have minutely gone through the impugned order passed by the learned SCJ/Rent Controller Mirpur and found the same as per the scheme of relevant law in judicious manner which has also rightly been concurred by the learned District Judge/Appellate Authority Rent Controller through the impugned order.
8. The petitioner miserably failed to make out case for interference in concurrent findings delivered by the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority. Findings given by the Rent Controller and the learned Appellate Authority are in consonance and nexus with law and fact, hence, merits no interference. Moreover, the learned counsel for the petitioner when confronted to point out violation of any law or fundamental right, he failed to satisfy the Court because spot inspection is only required when Court is of the opinion that evidence is insufficient to determine the real controversy which is not available in the instant matter.
9. In view of above, finding no essence in the instant writ petition, hence, issuance of notices to the other side and admission of the writ petition will be a futile exercise which also amounts to wastage of precious Court time as well, so, the writ instant petition entails dismissal at its inception.