IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present :- Hon’ble Justice Amrita Sinha WPA No. 25922 of 2024 Md. Fahim Haider Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

For the writ petitioner :- Mr. Sagar Bandopadhyay, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Soma Kar Ghosh, Adv.

Ms. Suparna Paul, Adv.

For the State :- Mr. Malay Kumar Dey, Adv.

Ms. Neelam Singh, Adv.

Heard on :- 12.02.2025 Judgment on :- 26.02.2025 Amrita Sinha, J.:-

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the communication made by the Additional District Magistrate (Try), North 24 Parganas being memo no. 234/1(4)/DPO/ICDS dated 9th March, 2023 intimating the petitioner that house rent of office accommodation of the Bhatpara ICDS project has been approved at Rs. 6,309/- (six thousand three hundred nine only) per month with effect from 1st August, 2020 inclusive of all taxes, outgoing and normal repair for hiring of the building of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is the owner of the subject premises and has let out the same on rent to the Child Development Project Officer, for running the Bhatpara ICDS project under the Directorate of Social Welfare, Government of West Bengal. A deed of lease was executed on 29th June, 1991 and the said lease was valid from 1st July, 1991. The initial rent of the subject premises was fixed at Rs. 1,690/-(one thousand six hundred ninety only).

3. The rent was revised in the year 2002 and the same was raised to Rs. 2,434/- (two thousand four hundred thirty-four only) per month with effect 1st August, 2002. With effect from 1st August, 2007 the rent was revised to Rs. 2,921/- (two thousand nine hundred twenty-one only) per month and the rent with effect from 1st August, 2012 was fixed at Rs. 3,505/- (three thousand five hundred five only) per month. On and from 1st August, 2017 the rent stood revised to Rs. 4,206/- (four thousand two hundred six only) per month.

4. Vide communication dated 10th December, 2020 by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, North 24 Parganas, Barasat, the petitioner was intimated that fair rent for the subject premises has been assessed at Rs. 19,450/- (nineteen thousand four hundred fifty only) with effect from 1st December, 2020.

5. Though the Special Land Acquisition Officer assessed the fair rent of the subject premises at Rs. 19,450/- (nineteen thousand four hundred fifty only) but, surprisingly, the enhanced rent was never paid to the petitioner. By the impugned communication dated 9th March, 2023 the petitioner was intimated that sanction has been granted for Rs. 6,309/- (six thousand three hundred nine only) as monthly rent. The petitioner is aggrieved by the same.

6. It has been submitted that the rent has been revised and reduced unilaterally without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The same is arbitrary exercise of power. Discrimination has been alleged. It has been submitted that the guidelines/ circulars applied for fixing the rent were not properly considered. Rent has been fixed without properly assessing the existing market value of the subject premises. Once the rate stood revised in 2020 the same could not have been revised further in 2023 in view of the bar imposed in the guideline published by the Deputy Secretary to the Land and Land Reforms department on 29th April, 2013.

7. The petitioner contends that he has been deprived from enjoying his property as per his choice and desire as the authority is not paying him the proper fair rent which the subject property will fetch.

8. Prayer has been made to direct the respondent authority to disburse rent in terms of the assessment of fair rent made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, North 24 Parganas, Barasat on 10th December, 2020.

9. Prayer has also been made seeking direction upon the respondents not to give any effect and/or further effect to the subsequent revision of rent communicated to the petitioner vide the impugned communication dated 9th March, 2023.

10. In support of the submission that the writ petition will be maintainable