Disposed

Rajendra Padhya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Nov 2024WPC/2109/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner approached High Court challenging Collector's rent fixation order after earlier appeals were dismissed. Court held remedy lies under Rent Control Act, 2011 before Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file appeal under Section 13 of Rent Control Act, 2011 before Rent Control Tribunal within four weeks of receipt of appeal.

Rajendra Padhya Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Landlord and Tenant | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

WPC No. 2109 of 2016

2024:CGHC:44851

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 2109 of 2016

¶7

Rajendra Padhya S/o Shri R.B. Padhya, Aged About 39 Years R/o Budh Vihar Chowk Araya Nagar, Durg, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisarh, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Durg, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶11

2 - Commissioner, Revenue, Division Durg Chhattisgarh

¶12

3 - Board of Revenue, Bench Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶13

4 - Joint Collector-cum-Rent Controlling Authority, Durg, District Durg,Chhattisgarh

¶14

5 - Assistant Director, Zila Hathkargha Karayalaya, Durg, District Durg Chhattisarh

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.	Jitendra Gupta, Advocate.
For Respondent/State : Ms.	Upasana Mehta, Dy. G.A.

¶17

¶18

WPC No. 2109 of 2016

¶19

Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, J

¶20

Order on Board

¶21

18/11/2024

¶22

By this present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the order dated 02/12/2014 (Annexure P-4), by which, the Collector has fixed the rent of the rental house of the petitioner which was given to the respondent No.5. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order of the Collector dated 02/12/2014, preferred an appeal in the Court of the learned Commissioner, Durg Division, Durg (C.G.) which was dismissed vide order dated 25/02/2016 (Annexure P-5) and affirmed the order of the Collector.

¶23

The petitioner then challenge the said order of the Commissioner, Durg Division, Durg before the Board of Revenue by preferring a Second Appeal under Section 44(2) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, which was disposed of with an observation that the remedy available to the petitioner was under Section 13 of the Rent Control Act, 2011 to file an appeal before the Tribunal constituted under the Rent Control Act, 2011.

¶24

Case of the petitioner is that after the order passed by the Board of Revenue, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal on 29/12/2014, but the Tribunal

¶25

¶26

WPC No. 2109 of 2016

¶27

refused to accept the said appeal and return back the memo of appeal to the petitioner, for which, he filed the present petition.

¶28

The respondent/State by filing a return, submits that the petitioner since beginning is pursuing his remedy in wrong forum to question the order of the Collector. In return, it has been submitted that, the petitioner is having a remedy under Section 13 of the Rent Control Act, 2011 before the Rent Control Tribunal, hence, he may be directed to file an appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal.

¶29

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶30

It is not in dispute that the Second Appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed holding that the petitioner is having a remedy under Section 13 of the Rent Control Act, 2011 to question the order impugned therein before the Rent Control Tribunal.

¶31

It appears from the record that though the petitioner has annexed the memo of appeal under Section 13 of the Rent Control Act, 2011 which was addressed to the Rent Control Tribunal, but no receipt or any acknowledgment is annexed with the said appeal, only the pleadings are there that the

¶32

¶33

WPC No. 2109 of 2016

¶34

Tribunal has return back the memo of appeal to the petitioner.

¶35

In view of the aforesaid fact, as contended by the respondent/State in paragraph 9 of its return that the petitioner earlier approached the Board of Revenue and the Board of Revenue has refused to entertain the Second Appeal on the ground that the petitioner is having alternative remedy under Section 13 of the Rent Control Act, 2011, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Rent Control Tribunal by filing an appeal under Section 13 of the Rent Control Act, 2011, to question the orders impugned. After receipt of the appeal, the Rent Control Tribunal, shall decide the said appeal in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the appeal.

¶36

SD/-

¶37

(Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge

¶38

Amardeep

Rajendra Padhya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Padhya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Chhattisgarh Packagers Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Pramod Kumar Agrawal Vs Board Of Revenue

M/s Chhattisgarh Packagers Pvt. Limited Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Nakul Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Oriental Public School Ambikapur Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Loyola School Bilaspur Vs State Of Chhattisgarh