STATE OF U.P. Vs. RAGHVENDRA NATH SRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave Granted.

(2.) The power of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to order enhancement of rent in a petition arising out of an order of the Rent Control Authority, is in dispute. The State of U.P. contends that the High Court could not haof assumed the function of the prescribed Authority to order the enhancement, whereas the respondent-landlords assert that the protections as provided for under Sec. 21 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 [ The Act] is not available to the appellant - tenants.

(3.) The forebears of the respondent-landlords let out the building in question to the Trade Tax Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh back in the year 1966. After some attempts to have the said property vacated in the 1990s, an application came to be filed for enhancement of rent [Case No.05/2008 before the City Magistrate/Rent Control Officer, Bahraich]. The total area of the plot was 5866 sq.ft. and covered area is 3645.06 sq.ft. in total. A perusal of the order reveals that the primary consideration in ordering enhancement of rent was that the location of the property being prime and central, along with taking note of the fact that the same Government Authority is paying a much higher rate for another, much smaller building. The Authority also recorded that a similarly placed building was rented out at a particular rate and then applied the same rate to the present case. At the rate Rs.4.00 per sq.ft., therefore, Rs.14,400.00 per month was fixed as the rent.