Back
Disaster Authority Can't Dodge Full Rent: Kerala HC Slams Occupation Cap in COVID Requisition Case
In a landmark ruling amid lingering COVID-era disputes, the has mandated that the pay rent for every room in a requisitioned building—regardless of whether they were occupied. Justice Viju Abraham, delivering the verdict in N. Rajendran v. State of Kerala (W.P.(C) No. 31589 of 2022), set aside an arbitrator's award that shortchanged the owner based on government guidelines. This decision reinforces statutory supremacy over executive fiat, as echoed in recent media reports highlighting the court's clarification on quarantine compensations.
Quarantined Lodge Sparks Rent Row
N. Rajendran, a 66-year-old proprietor of Raga Residency—a 25-room lodging house in Kayamkulam, Alappuzha—saw his property seized on , by the District Collector as Chairman of the (DDMA). Under , the entire facility, keys included, was handed over for institutional quarantine amid the pandemic. Possession lasted 155 days, until .
Rajendran claimed rent at Rs.500 per room per night, totaling nearly Rs.19.375 lakhs, citing
, which ties compensation to
"the rent payable in respect of the premises."
Initial payments came after court prodding in prior writs—Rs.4.32 lakhs net after tax—but fell short, limited to "actual occupation" days per Government Orders (GOs) Ext.P3 and P4. Damages to fittings ran Rs.4.22 lakhs, prompting arbitration under DMA's proviso. The arbitrator's
award (Ext.P6) stuck to GO caps: Rs.500/room/night, but only for up to 14 days per occupant or actual stay.
Aggrieved, Rajendran challenged it via writ, arguing the full premises were requisitioned, entitling him to rent for all rooms throughout.
Petitioner's Push: Full Possession, Full Payment
Rajendran contended the seizure was a "," binding authorities to pay for the entire 25 rooms over 155 days, irrespective of occupancy. He slammed Ext.P4 GO—capping pay at individual stays—as arbitrary, violating Section 66's rent-based formula. Citing prior court orders forcing possession return and partial payout, he invoked precedents like Manager, Aided U.P. School v. T.N. Mahesh (2004 KHC 1614), barring executive overrides of statutes, and 's Rajeev Lochan Shah v. State (2023 KHC 3074), affirming compensation even sans actual use. SR Educational & Charitable Trust v. State of Kerala (2025 KHC 592) bolstered his statutory rights claim.
State's Stand: GO Guidelines Govern Usage
The arbitrator and state respondents defended Ext.P6, leaning on Ext.P3/P4 GOs. These fixed Rs.500/room for non-classified lodges but limited to
"14 days or actual stay, whichever lesser,"
for tourism assets with
input. They admitted requisition but argued compensation tied to occupancy, claiming all "legally due" was paid. No denial of possession, but insistence: empty rooms don't accrue rent.
Court's Verdict: Statute Trumps GO, Rent for Every Room
Justice Abraham dissected Section 66(1): compensation hinges on
"rent payable in respect of the premises,"
not usage. Ext.P3 GO itself mandated DDMA adherence to Section 66 factors. Ext.P4's occupancy cap? "Totally impermissible," as
"provisions of a Statute cannot be modified by way of an executive order."
Drawing from
Manager, Aided U.P. School
, executive orders can't suspend rules. Uttarakhand's
Rajeev Lochan
was pivotal:
"S.66... does not lay down that in case the premise is requisitioned and it is not used in actuality then the person interested shall not be entitled to the compensation."
Even unused, requisition triggers full rent.
The arbitrator erred by grafting GO limits onto statutory mandate—when DDMA holds keys to all 25 rooms for 155 days, all accrue Rs.500/night.
Key Observations
"Compensation has to be determined by taking into consideration... (i) the rent payable in respect of the premises..."(, as interpreted)
"When the building as a whole is in the possession of the Disaster Management Authority, they are bound to pay the rent for all the rooms in the building for the period it was in their possession irrespective of whether the rooms were occupied or not."
"The G.O. relied heavily upon... cannot override the provisions enacted by the parliament as the parliament is supreme in law making."(Quoting )
Full Payout Ordered: Balance + Interest
The writ succeeded: Ext.P6 set aside insofar as denying full claim. DDMA must pay Rs.500 x 25 rooms x 155 days, balance over prior Rs.4.32 lakhs plus 6% interest from due date—within one month.
This ruling shields property owners from partial compensations in emergencies, prioritizing DMA's plain text over convenience-driven GOs. Future requisitions demand full reckoning of "premises" value, potentially reshaping pandemic accountability claims.
