1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.2159/2009. : : Umashankar Sultania Vs. Judge, Rent Tribunal, Jhunjhunu & Ors. : : Date of Order 20.4.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Hemant Sharma for the petitioner. This writ petition seeks to challenge the order dated 13.5.2008 passed by Rent Tribunal, Jhunjhunu whereby petition filed by petitioner under the Rent Control Act, 2001 with respect to premises situated at Municipal Board, Chidawa was dismissed and was returned to him to be presented before the competent Court. The sole premise on which the petitioner has challenged the said order is that by virtue of deletion of words “having population of exceeding 50,000” from sub-section (2) of Section 1 of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001. The dispute between landlord and tenant even for the premises which are situated in Municipal Board, Chidawa would be liable to be brought before Rent Tribunal and not the ordinary Civil Court. This 2 controversy was already set at rest by judgment of this Court in Rampal Vs. All Brahmin Swarnkar Panchayat & Ors. : WLC 2007 (4), 532 while holding that by mere deletion of words “having population of exceeding 50,000” from sub-section (2) of Section 1 of Rent Control Act, 2001 by itself would not become applicable to municipal area. Unless, specific notification to that effect is issued by State Government, the Rent Control Act would not be applicable to municipal area other than the district headquarters. Only effect of amendment is that notification can now be issued by the State Government even in relation to such municipal town where the population is less than 50,000, which it could not issue before the said amendment. Same view was expressed in Akhtar Ali Vs. ADJ (Fast Track), Merta City & Ors 208 (1) RLW, 274. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.56.