Rajeev Kumar vs. The State Of Jharkhand

Facts

The petitioner, Rajeev Kumar, filed a writ petition challenging a bill dated May 31, 2022, issued by the Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee (JNAC). This bill demanded a rent of Rs. 13,600 plus GST of Rs. 2,448 for a shop in Sakchi market, Jamshedpur. The petitioner argued that this represented an arbitrary enhancement of over 5000% from the previous rent of Rs. 93.25 charged by Tata Steel JUSCO. The petition also challenged a letter dated May 1, 2022, from the Sub-Divisional Officer cum Rent Controller, Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur, which purportedly fixed rent at Rs. 80 per square foot without affording any opportunity of hearing to shop owners. The petitioner sought to quash these demands and orders, requesting that rent enhancement follow the procedure under the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 2011.

Held

The Court did not decide on the merits of the rent enhancement or the procedural challenges. Instead, after some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition. The petitioner requested liberty to pursue their remedy before the Rent Controller, where similar proceedings were stated to be pending. The respondents' counsel raised no objection to this request. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition with the liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the Rent Controller. No specific findings were made on the issues raised, and the operative directions were limited to disposing of the petition with liberty to pursue alternative remedies. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided, as the matter was withdrawn.

Key Issues

1. Whether the enhancement of rent by the Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee (JNAC) through Bill No. JNAC/22-23/1047 dated 31.05.2022, from Rs. 93.25 to Rs. 13,600 plus GST, is arbitrary and without basis, violating principles of natural justice by not providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner? 2. Whether the letter dated 01.05.2022 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer cum Rent Controller, Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur, fixing rent at Rs. 80 per square foot, is arbitrary and liable to be quashed for failing to afford any opportunity of hearing to shop owners, including the petitioner? 3. Whether the rent enhancement should be conducted in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 2011? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the rent enhancement was arbitrary, excessive, and made without any notice or opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice. They relied on the previous rent amount charged by Tata Steel JUSCO as a benchmark. The petitioner sought to enforce the procedural requirements of the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 2011. Respondents' arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondents regarding the merits of the rent enhancement or the procedural challenges. However, they did not object to the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition.