Shri. Nirmal Kumar Sen vs The Additional District Magistrate and Others

Prasenjit Mandal, J.—The writ petitioner has filed this writ application praying for the following reliefs:-

a) A Writ and/or Writs do issue in the nature of mandamus setting aside and/or quashing and/or canceling and/or annulling the impugned order/letter under reference No. 3-12/87/Naval/746 dated 30th of October, 2009(Annexure P-5 to the writ petition).

b) A Writ and/or Writs do issue in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent Authorities to assess the rate of rent for the premise in question in terms of the decision of the Hiring Committee published in the Daily Telegrams newspaper dated February 03, 2009(Annexure P-2).

c) A Writ and/or Writs do issue in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent Authorities, more particularly to the Respondent no.4 hereinabove to clear outstanding rent @Rs. 5.23 per Sq.ft to the petitioner as per the bills with other relief benefits which the petitioner entitle under law.

d) A Writ of certiorari be issued commanding the Respondent Authorities and each of them to present proceeding for giving conscionable justice to the present petition.

e) Rule NISI in terms of prayer A and B above.

f) Cost the present application

g) To pass such other or further order or orders, direction or directions do issue as this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper.

The short question involved in the matter is whether the writ petitioner is entitled to get rent in respect of premises in question as per decision of the respondent authorities published on February 03, 2009 in the Daily Telegrams newspaper.

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the materials on record, I find that whenever the government takes any premises from a private party on rent for office or other kind of accommodation, the rent is determined by the concerned Hiring Committee constituted by the Administration for the purpose of assessment of the rent of the premises taken from the private person. Such rent is revised by the concerned Hiring Committee from time to time and a different chart is prepared for assessment of the rent according to the locality. The respondent no.4 took the premises of the writ petitioner on the first floor of the premises under Survey No. 105 at Lambaline under Tehsil Port Blair, District South Andaman on a monthly basis which was determined @Rs. 546/-initially. But the rent was not enhanced. Subsequently, the petitioner claimed the rent as notified by the Administration in the Daily Telegrams newspaper dated February 03, 2009. His prayer was turned down.

As per decision dated September 01 of 2009 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Hon''ble Court, Circuit Bench in W.P.No. 94 of 2009, it was held that that market rent for the premises hired by the government department from private persons had been assessed as per Notification. That decision has reference to the office order no. 699 dated March 20, 1974 issued by the Chief Commissioner, Secretariat. The Hiring Committee formed subsequently serves for the same purpose for assessment of rent payable to the landlord in case of hire by the government for its department. Therefore, in view of such observations made above in the said writ petition, I am of the view that the petitioner is also entitled to get the benefit of revising the rent for the premises in question as prevailing in the locality. Accordingly, I am of the view that the order of the Administration dated October 30, 2009 directing the petitioner to resubmit the rent bill with effect from May 2009 @Rs. 1500/- per month cannot be supported.

Mr. Jayapal has emphasized much on the decision rendered by the learned Single Bench of this Hon''ble Court, Circuit Bench in W.P. No. 94 of 2009 and thus he has submitted that as per observations of the said decision, the Hon''ble Court should grant the similar reliefs in the instance case. On the other hand Mr. Tabraiz, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2 has contended that such type of relief cannot be granted. The writ petition is not maintainable, in view of the reliefs sought for in the petition. With due respect to Mr. Tabraiz, I am of the opinion that the reliefs as sought for in prayer (a) and (b) could well be considered in the writ petition. The other reliefs should not be granted in favour of the petitioner.

Therefore, the writ in the nature of mandamus as prayed for in prayer(a) should be granted. Similarly, the prayer(b) of the writ petitioner for assessment of the rent of the premises in question as prayed for in prayer(b) is also be granted. So, if these two reliefs are granted and the respondents are directed to assess the rent for the premises in question within a specified period, I am of the view that such reliefs would subserve the ends of justice. The relief sought for in prayer(c) cannot be granted because an opportunity should be granted to the Hiring Committee to decide the rent as per the Notification dated February 03, 2009. The other reliefs are formal.

Therefore, the reliefs as sought for in prayer (a) and (b) of the writ petition are granted. The respondents are directed to assess the rate of rent for the premises in question in terms of the Notification published in the Daily Telegrams newspaper dated February 03, 2009 (Annexure P/2) within a time of 3 months from the date of communication of this order.

The writ petition is disposed of in the manner indicated above. There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent Xerox certified copy of this judgement be supplied to the parties, if applied for, on observing all requisite formalities..