WAKF ALLAHTALA Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a public charitable trust known by the name of Wakf Allahtala Masjid Sipiyan Bazar Ganj. Thakurdwara, district Moradabad. THE Trust owns certain shops and other properties. One of its shops is in the tenancy of opposite party no. 2, Ashfaq Husain, on a rent of Rs. 20/- per mensem. Saghir Ahmad, Mutwalli of wakf, made an application before the Prescribed Authority under Sec. 9-A of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for revision of rent of the shop let out to Ashfaq Husain, to Rs. 40/- per month.

(2.) ASHFAQ Husain, the tenant contested the proceedings. He prayed for the rejection of the application by the petitioner and reduction of the rent to Rs. 15/-per month. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate by his order dated 31-3-1979 fixed the rent of the shop at Rs. 25/- per mensem. Aggrieved, Saghir Ahmad, Mutwalli of the wakf, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the aforesaid order of the Prescribed Authority.

(3.) SEC. 9-A (1) of the Act stipulates that the District Magistrate shall revise the rent when an application is made under the aforesaid provisions. The criteria for the revision of rent have also been laid down in sub-sec. (1). Sub-sec. (1) empowers the District Magistrate to revise monthly rent to one-twelfth of ten per cent of the market value of the building under tenancy. The relevant consideration is the market value of the building under tenancy. The annual rent would be ten per cent of the market value and the monthly rent would be one-twelfth thereof. It is, therefore, imperative for the District Magistrate to arrive at the market value of the building under tenancy. The District Magistrate is under a legal duty to revise the rent of the building under tenancy only after determining the market value of the property. Where he does not determine the market value of the property, any figure arrived at by him as the suitable or appropriate rent for the building under tenancy would not be in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Legislature having provided the criteria for revising the rent of a commercial building or shop let out by a public religious institution, it is the bounden duty of the District Magistrate or the official exercising his powers under this provision to act in accordance with the criteria laid down by the legislature. While revising the rent the District Magistrate must address himself to the market value and then calculate the rent, in accordance with the principles laid down in SECtion 9-A of the Act. The District Magistrate cannot ignore the norms and principles laid down in SECtion 9-A of the Act and determine the rent in some other way.