SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Nagesh Bheemapaka, J.
B.Ravinder Reddy - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, & others - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 28885 of 2021
Decided On : 19-12-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : R.A. Chary
For the Respondent: GP For Social Welfare (TG)

The State is obligated to pay rent for occupied private property, while courts cannot override administrative determinations unless proven arbitrary.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petition concerning rent fixation and occupancy of private property - Petitioner alleges non-payment of rent and arbitrary fixation by government authorities, asserting rights under G.O.Ms.No.186 and related proceedings - Court recognizes the obligation of the State to pay rent for occupied properties but rejects enhancement claims based on administrative assessments. (Paras 1.1, 6, 8, 11)

(B) Administrative Law - Jurisdiction under Article 226 - Court may not substitute its own determination for that of the competent authority unless found arbitrary or perverse. (Para 7)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner, owner of a specific building, leased it to the State for welfare purposes. Respondents failed to pay rent from August 2018 until December 2021 and issued a notice fixing rent unilaterally, prompting the lawsuit.

Findings of Court:
The State must pay arrears at Rs. 10/- per square foot, as determined by a competent committee, within eight weeks. The claim for higher rent was rejected.

Issues: The primary issues included the legality of the unilateral fixation of rent, violation of natural justice in notice issuance, and the appropriateness of the rent determined by the Respondents.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that while rent must be paid, it cannot substitute its judgment for the administrative committee’s if there is no arbitrariness or illegality found.

Result: Writ petition allowed in part; Respondents directed to pay arrears of rent.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's ownership and rent grievances. (Para 1)
2. respondents' defense and justifications for actions. (Para 3)
3. court's analysis of rent fixation and obligations. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
4. determination of rent entitlement and obligations. (Para 11)
5. court's order on payment of rent arrears. (Para 12 , 13)

ORDER :

Nagesh Bheemapaka, J.

The case of Petitioner is that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the building bearing H.No.2-4- 123/A/12/2 situated at Padmavathi Colony, Swaroop Nagar, Uppal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana State. He has been leasing his buildings to Respondent authorities for welfare activities for several years. In 2007, Respondent authorities had taken on lease another building belonging to Petitioner for the purpose of running an SC Child Beggar Home and fixed the rent at Rs.10/- per square foot. According to Petitioner, Respondent authorities paid rent regularly and without default till the month of September, 2017.

1.1. It is stated, the said building gradually became old and dilapidated and was rendered unfit for continued occupation. In view of the unsafe condition, Respondent authorities shifted SC Child Beggar Home from the earlier premises to Petitioner's new building bearing H.No.2-4- 123/A/12/2 during July/August, 2018. It is contended, even prior to such shifting, Respondents failed to pay rent from October, 2017 to July, 2018. After shifting into the new building with effect from 01.08.2018, Respondents continued to occupy the premises without paying any rent whatsoever. It is stated, after the hostel was shifted to the new building, petitioner made several representations to Respondent authorities requesting to revise and fix the rent at Rs.18/- by modifying the earlier rate of Rs. 10/- per square foot, taking into consideration the prevailing rental value in the locality. The total area of the building is approximately 4,800 square feet. Petitioner asserts that despite repeated representations, Respondents neither revised nor paid rent due from 01.08.2018 onwards.

1.2. Petitioner further assails the notice dated 24.10.2021 issued by the 2nd Respondent, wherein rent was unilaterally fixed at Rs.10/- per square foot for 3,700 square feet with effect from 01.08.2018, and directions were simultaneously issued to vacate the building immediately. In the said notice, it is stated, rent would be paid to Petitioner only after receipt of budget from the Commissioner, SCDD, Telangana, Hyderabad. The said notice was issued abruptly, without affording any opportunity of hearing, and without considering her earlier representations, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.

1.3. It is further stated that without settling the arrears of rent payable from 01.08.2018, Respondent authorities vacated the premises on 26.10.2021 and issued a letter through the Hostel Welfare Officer informing about vacation. Petitioner thereafter, submitted the representation dated 28.10.2021 requesting the Respondent authorities to pay the rent by fixing the rate at Rs 18/- per square foot, taking into account the prevailing rental value and the rent fixed for similarly situated private buildings. The said representation has not been considered till date.

1.4. Petitioner places reliance on G.O.Ms. No 186 Finance (EBS X) Department dated 22.12.2017, wherein instructions were issued to the Welfare Departments to fix rent for private buildings taken on lease based on the prevailing rental value in each District. He also relies upon the proceedings of the Additional Collector, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, dated 01.07.2021, wherein rent was fixed at Rs.17.50 per square foot for a private building occupied for Government SC College Boys Hostel at Jeedimetla, situated in the same District. Despite the said Government Order and the fixation made by the Additional Collector in the same District, Respondents failed to extend similar treatment to her building, thereby acting in an arbitrary

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top