CHANDIGARH, May 18, 2026 – The Punjab and Haryana High Court has referred a legal challenge against the implementation of the Assam Tenancy Act, 2021, in Chandigarh to the appropriate roster Bench after initial arguments were presented before Chief Justice Sheel Nagu.
The joint petition, moved by the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association and the UT District Bar Association, challenges a May 6 notification by the Ministry of Home Affairs that repealed the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, to introduce the Assam framework. Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate Chetan Mittal maintained that transferring adjudicatory functions to bureaucrats violates core legal doctrines.
“One of the principal grievances against the impugned framework was that the ‘Rent Authority’ and appellate functions had effectively been placed in the hands of executive officers already burdened with administrative responsibilities,” Mittal stated.
The senior counsel asserted that powers historically handled by civil courts have been reassigned to tehsildars and additional deputy commissioners. He noted that this reordering contradicts established legal precedent regarding tribunalisation, which dictates that tenancy adjudication must remain under the purview of judicial officers rather than executive administrators.
The legal challenge raises broader questions regarding the constitutional limits of delegated legislation. The petitioners declared that using an administrative notification to repeal a long-standing statutory law represents an unconstitutional overreach, pointing out that federal authorities completely overlooked Chandigarh’s distinct urban architecture, local planning requirements, and structural realities when importing a law designed for Assam.
Practitioners also stated that the swift structural shift has triggered severe operational difficulties for the legal community due to a complete absence of supporting tribunal infrastructure.
Furthermore, the plea contends that the newly introduced regulations dilute critical tenant safeguards that have formed the bedrock of regional rent-control jurisprudence. Under the new provisions, landlords can initiate eviction proceedings through simple notices without demonstrating personal necessity, while tenants who remain on the premises post-termination risk facing steep, compounding penal rent rates.
