Vimla Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6843 of 2024 ====================================================== Vimla Devi Wife of Late Raghunath Raut, R/o Mohalla-Chand Chaura, Vishunpath Road, P.S.- Civil Line, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Samwas Sadan Samiti, Gaya through its Secretary. 3.

The District Magistrate- cum- Chairman, Samwas Sadan Samiti, Gaya. 4.

The Administrator- cum- Senior Deputy Collector, Samwas Sadan Samiti, Gaya.

5.

The Secretary, Samwas Sadan Samiti, Gaya.

6.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar Gaya, District- Gaya. 7.

The Special Officer, Collectoriate, Gaya.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.

Mr.Sunil Kumar Yadav, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mrs. Anuradha Singh, SC-21 Mr. Kumar Samarjeet Singh, AC to SC-21 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 04-07-2024 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief:- "1(i). For quashing of the Order dated 14.06.2023/20.06.2023 passed by House Controller Officer- Cum Sub. Divisional Officer, (Respondent no.-6) in House Control case No.- 06/2023 whereby and whereunder the rent of Shops is determined at the rate of Rs. 18/- per Square Feet after cancelling the four clarification of shops and making it in one class whereas enhancement/ fixation is only permissible upto 50 percent but in the instant case the enhancement/ fixation of rent of shop is more than four times of

Patna High Court CWJC No.6843 of 2024(2) dt.04-07-2024 2/2 the previous rent and as such the action of the respondents is in contrary to the rules framed under Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Rules, 1983 and hence the impugned order is fit to be quashed."

2.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a direction upon the appellate authority to dispose off the pending appeal, filed by the petitioner, bearing Appeal No. 7 of 2022.

3.

Per contra, the learned counsel for the Respondent-State submits that in case, the aforesaid appeal is yet to be disposed off, the same shall definitely be disposed off within a fixed time frame, as is fixed by this Court.

4.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit and proper to direct the appellate authority to dispose of the aforesaid appeal, filed by the petitioner, by passing a reasoned and a speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks of receipt / production of a copy of this order.

5.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed off. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U