RENU DAS Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COLLECTOR KAMRUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners who are absolute owners of the plot of land and house in question, a three storied building, requisitioned 'by the Deputy Commissioner and Collector, Kamrup Respondent No. 1, vide Memo dated 28.5.85 under Section 3 (I) of the Assam Land (Requsition &. Acquisition) Act, 1964 for short the Act of 1965, for the purpose of office accommodation and residential purpose of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Guwahati, prayed for (a) direction to the Respondent No. 1 & 2 to de-requisition the building and a direction to respondent Nos. 3 & 5 to handover the vacant physical possession of the said requisitioned building, (b) a direction to the respondents to pay house rent of the requisitioned building @ Rs. 24,500/ per month as fixed by the respondent No. 1 with effect from 29.5.90, (c) a direction to respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to refer to the petition dated 7.3.88 and 2.9.88 preferred by the petitioners for determination of proper rant of the requisitioned building.

(2.) It is an admitted, position that the three-storied building in question was requisitioned by the respondent No. 1 vide Annexure-A & B to the petition and the possession of the building in question was handed over to the Tribunal on 11.10.85 as per Certificate Annexure-2 to the affidavit-in-opposition. The contesting respondents No. 3, 5 and 6 also admit that the petitioner had prayed for de-requisition of the building to the concerned authority the Deputy Commissioner who by his letter dated 3.9.90 sought for views of the Tribunal in this regard. The Tribunal informed the Deputy Commissioner that it had no objection to de-requisition provided other alternative accommodation around the High Court at Guwahati was made available. Since no such accommodation around the High Court as desired by the Tribunal was available around the High Court, the Tribunal did not consent to the derequisition of the building in question. It is the petitioner's pleaded case that he approadhed the Respondent No. 1 time and again for fixation of proper rent. The first representation submitted by him in this behalf was on 9.3.88 Annexure-C claiming rent at the prevailing rate of Rs. 250 per sq. ft. Since no action was taken he submitted yet another petition on 2.9.88 Annexure-D. The petitioner has further pleaded that it was incumbent on the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to re-assess the house rent every five years for the requisitioned property as provided under the law. Since nothing was done by the respondent, the petitioner on 16.7.89 again repeated this request for reassessment of the house rent vide Annexure-E. Accordingly the respondent No. 1 directed the Executive Engineer, Central P.W.D. at Guwahati to assess the house rent of the requisitioned buillding and on the basis of assessment made by the Executive Engineer toe standard rent in respect of the requisitioned building was fixed at Rs. 24,500/- per month with effect from 29.5.90. The respondent No. 2 issued a rent certificate to this effect on 8.7.91 (Annexure-F) directing the Tribunal to pay the above rent to the petitioner. When the petitioner demanded the above rent the respondent Nos. 3 and 5 did not pay the same under one pretext or other although the petitioner had made written request vide Annexure-D therefore.

(3.) The respondent Tribunal vide letter dated 25.2.92 Annexure-H informed the Additional Deputy Commissioner that the matter of payment of house rent @ Rs. 24,500/- had been referred to the Principal Bench. The Tribunal was again requested by the Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure-I and J to pay the house rent as fixed imediately and clear up the dues. The Tribunal has failed to pay accordingly and the petitioner had been receiving house rent as initially fixed under protest.