(1.) Aggrieved by order dated 10.05.2013 in House Control Revision No. 79 of 2007, the present writ petition has been filed.
(2.) Briefly stated, on the application of the respondent no. 5 for determination of fair rent, H.C. Case No. 41 of 1995 was initiated. The father of the petitioner was occupying the premises for the last 40 years on a monthly rent of Rs. 30/. The Block Development Officer was directed to conduct an enquiry and submit a report whereupon, the Circle Officer asked the Labour Enforcement Officer to conduct an enquiry. The Circle officer forwarded the report on 10.10.1998 and thereafter, a notice was issued to the petitioner on 30.10.1998 to file his reply. After hearing the parties, the Sub Divisional Officer-cum-House Rent Controller passed order dated 16.05.2000 fixing fair rent @ 7/per sq. ft. The appeal as well as revision preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a specific plea was taken by the petitioner before the authority that no notice was issued to the petitioner before the Circle Officer submitted a report and that without taking measurement a report was submitted however, the said plea was not considered by the courts below. Referring to Rule 3(i) of Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Rules, 1983, the learned counsel submits that the Circle Officer was under a duty to hear the tenant before a report is submitted to the House Rent Controller. The contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is liable to be dismissed. The reply filed by the petitioner in H.C. Case No. 41 of 1991 discloses that a plea on the question of hearing by the Circle Officer was not taken by the petitioner. Neither Sec. 8 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 nor Rule 3 of Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Rules, 1983 provides that the evidence regarding the prevailing rent in the area must be collected in presence of the tenant. Rule 3(i) and (ii) provides as under :