Concept and Scope of Judicial Review in India — Latest Development

The Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association, Chandigarh, and the District Bar Association, District Courts, Chandigarh, have jointly moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the Centre's May 6, 2026 notification extending the Assam Tenancy Act, 2021 to the Union Territory of Chandigarh. This move comes as a response to the Centre invoking Section 87 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966, which empowers it to extend to Chandigarh any law in force in Punjab. However, the petitioners contend that the provision does not confer powers upon the Centre to repeal, amend, or enact laws in conflict with an existing law applicable to the Union Territory.

Legal Framework and Implications

The petitioners relied upon the Constitution Bench judgment in Constitution of India and Delhi Laws Act (1912), reported as 1951 AIR Supreme Court 332, and the judgment in Ramesh Birich and Others v Union of India and Others, 1989 RCR (Rent) 79, pertaining to Chandigarh’s Rent Act, to argue that the impugned notification is unconstitutional. Another major ground of challenge relates to the authorities created under the new law. The petitioners pointed out that under the Assam Tenancy Act, 2021, the Tehsildar has been designated as the Rent Authority under Section 30, while the Additional Deputy Commissioner has been appointed as the Appellate Authority/Rent Court under Section 33. This is in contrast to the earlier Rent Act, where such matters were adjudicated by judicial officers, with the Sub Judge First Class acting as Rent Controller and the District Judge as the Appellate Authority.

• ▸The Right to Information Act 2005 has been cited in similar contexts to highlight the importance of transparency in governance.
• ▸The National Urban Rental Housing Policy aims to provide a framework for rental housing across the country.
• ▸The Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 deals with the eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises.

Significance and Way Forward

The challenge to the extension of the Assam Tenancy Act, 2021 to Chandigarh raises significant questions about the Centre's powers under the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 and the implications for the Union Territory's existing legal framework. The petitioners' argument that the authorities created under the new law may not have the requisite judicial mind to adjudicate matters is a critical one, given the principles of separation of powers between the executive and judiciary. As the case is likely to be taken up by the appropriate Division Bench, it will be crucial to examine the constitutional and legal provisions at play and their potential impact on the governance of Chandigarh.

Conclusion and Broader Implications

The challenge to the Centre's notification extending the Assam Tenancy Act, 2021 to Chandigarh is a significant development in the context of the Union Territory's governance and the balance of power between the Centre and the states. As the case unfolds, it will be essential to consider the broader implications of the Centre's actions and the potential impact on the federal structure of India. The petitioners' reliance on landmark judgments such as the Maneka Gandhi Judgment and the Kesavananda Bharati Case highlights the importance of judicial oversight in ensuring that the executive does not overstep its constitutional bounds.