IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4606 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:05.09.2011 Ramandeep Singh and others ....Petitioners Versus Mrs. Nirmaljit Sidhu ....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present:Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. G.S.Dhaliwal, Advocate for the respondent. * * * RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J (ORAL) This is tenants' revision petition challenging the impugned order dated 07.06.2011 whereby their eviction was ordered under Section 13-B of the the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Rent Act') as extended to Chandigarh. At the time of motion hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners has challenged the impugned order, on the ground that the notification dated 09.10.2009, whereby Section 13-B of the Rent Act, was made applicable to the Chandigarh, was illegal. However, the extension of the aforesaid provisions of the Rent Act, vide notification dated 09.10.2009 issued by the Central Government has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.15378 of 2011 titled as Asha Chawla & others Vs. Union of India & others decided on 23.08.2011. Civil Revision No.4606 of 2011 (O&M) -2- In view of the aforesaid authoritative law laid down by the Division Bench, the argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners does not survive. No other point has been argued. Dismissed. September 5, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) savita JUDGE