Judgment :- Om Prakash, C.J. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The only question for consideration in this appeal, arising from the judgment dated 1st April, 1998, is whether Ext. P1 notification exempting a set of institutions from the rigours of the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1965 (briefly, 'the act) is violative of Art.14 of the Constitution. 3. Adverting to the case law germane on the issue, the learned Single Judge concluded that by S.25 of the Act, Government was fully empowered in public interest to exempt any building or class of buildings from the provisions of the Act. Therefore, the contention of the appellant that Ext. P1 notification was violative of Art.14 of the Constitution, was negatived and the O.P. was dismissed. We have gone through the case law relied on by the learned Single Judge. We are of the considered view that Ext. P1 notification is not violative of Art.14 of the Constitution and, hence, is not liable to be struck down. 4. By Ext. P1 notification, buildings belonging to churches/ mosques of all the minority religions came to be exempted in the public interest from the provisions of the Act. In S. Kandaswamy Chettiar v. State of T.N. (AIR 1985 SC 257) a notification analogous to the impugned Ext. P1 notification, granting total exemption to all buildings owned by Hindu, Christian and Muslim religious public trusts and public charitable trusts from all the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act (18 of 1960) was made. The Supreme Court held that such notification was not violative of Art.14 of the Constitution. This authority was also relied on by the learned Single Judge. 5. We are of the view that the case law relied on by the learned Single Judge is fully applicable to the case at hand and, therefore, we agree with the view taken by the learned Single Judge in holding that Ext. P1 notification was not violative of Art.14 of the Constitution. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.