IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.16995 OF 2025 D. G. M. & A Operated S. A. B. English Medium School through Principal Ashwini Harish Suryawanshi …Petitioner Versus Shivaji Laxman Bhamare …Respondent Mr. Jayendra Khairnar a/w. Mr. Harsh Nishar a/w. Ms. Gauri Kulkarni and Ms. Aleema Bohra, for the Petitioner.

Mr. Aditya S. Chandak, for the Respondent.

CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18^th DECEMBER 2025 DATE OF UPLOADING: 20^th DECEMBER 2025 JUDGMENT:

1. Heard Mr. Jayendra Khairnar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Chandak, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent.

2. By the present Writ Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the challenge is to the legality and validity of the order dated 25^th August 2025 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner (Rent Act), Nashik Division, Nashik in Appeal/Revision No.275 of 2025 filed under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (“Rent Act”) as also to the order dated 23^rd August 2024 passed by the Competent Authority, Rent Control Act Court, Nashik Division, Nashik in Application No.4 of 2023 filed under Section 24 of the Rent Act.

3. By the impugned order of the Competent Authority, the Petitioner has been directed to handover the vacant and peaceful possession of the subject premises and further has been directed to pay license fee at the double rate i.e. Rs.5,000/-x 2= Rs.10,000/- per month from 18^th June 2020 till handing over the possession of the subject premises to the Respondent. The said order has been confirmed by the learned Additional Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik by the impugned order dated 25^th August

2025.

4. It is the contention of learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner that the premises has been given specifically for running an English Medium School. He therefore, submits that the Competent Authority exercising power under Section 24 read with Section 42 of the Rent Act has no jurisdiction to deal with the said application as admittedly, the subject premises has been taken on Leave and License basis for running an English Medium School.

5. On the other hand, Mr. Chandak, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent submits that Leave and License Agreement was for a period of three years w.e.f. 10^th June 2017. The Petitioner has continued to occupy the subject premises even thereafter. Learned Counsel, therefore submits that the Competent Authority has rightly passed the order of eviction which has been confirmed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik.

6. Perusal of the record shows that clause No.2 of the Leave and License Agreement dated 10^th June 2017 executed between the Respondent (Licensor) and the Petitioner (Licensee) specifically provides that subject premises has been given for running an English Medium School.

7. In view of the said specific term in the written Leave and License Agreement dated 10^th June 2017, it is necessary to set out certain provisions of the Rent Act.

i. Sub-Section (1) of Section 24 of the Rent Act:

“24. Landlord entitled to recover possession of premises given on licence on expiry (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, a licensee, in possession or occupation of premises given to him on license for residence shall deliver possession of such premises to the landlord on expiry of the period of licence; and on the failure of the licensee to so deliver the possession of the licensed premises, a landlord shall be entitled to recover possession of such premises from a licensee, on the expiry of the period of licence, by making an application to the Competent Authority, and the Competent Authority, on being satisfied that the period of licence has expired, shall pass an order for eviction of a licensee.”

(Emphasis added)

ii. Explanation (a) to Section 24:

“(a) the expression “landlord” includes a successor- in-interest who becomes the landlord of the premises as a result