Hon'ble Mrs. Jayashree Tiwari,J.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
None appears for the contesting respondent, though service is sufficient.
This petition is directed against the order dated 14.3.2001 by which the appeal of the contesting respondent under Section 33 of the Urban Ceiling Regulation Act, 1976 has been allowed.
It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the Ceiling Act had been repealed w.e.f. 18.3.1999 and therefore, the District Judge neither had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal nor allow it.
No doubt, where an order is passed in inherent lack of jurisdiction, this Court is entitled to quash it. However, in the present case, it has been found by the learned District Judge that notice under Section 18(3) of the Act was never served on the land holder and this finding of fact has not been shown to be erroneous. In case this petition is allowed, it will revive another illegal order passed under Section 8(4) of the Act.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 7.1.2010 AKT