Authority: High Court of Judicature at Patna
Order Date: 31-08-2026
Case Overview
- Parties: Petitioner – Draupti Devi (owner of land, Khata No. 679, Khesra No. 829, approx. 7.48 dismal acres); Respondents – State of Bihar (Principal Secretary Health Department) and multiple officials of the Bihar State AIDS Control Society (BSACS) and the District Magistrate‑Cum‑Collector, Patna.
- Nature of Proceeding: Civil writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to pay rent for a godown premises allegedly occupied by BSACS.
- Background:
- Tender notice dated 01‑04‑2022 published in Hindustan Daily and on the BSACS website (www.bsacs.in) invited applications for renting a godown of 4,000‑4,500 sq ft.
- Pre‑bid meeting held on 29‑04‑2022; bids submitted by 11‑05‑2022; bid opening on the same day at 4 pm.
- Draupti Devi’s land (Tulsi Nagar, Gola Road, Danapur, Patna) was selected; an offer letter issued for 3,940 sq ft.
- Ground‑floor area of 1,593.44 sq ft was taken on 01‑08‑2022 at a rate of Rs 2,290 per sq ft, amounting to Rs 36,489.77 per month.
- First‑floor area of approximately 2,300 sq ft was taken on 25‑09‑2022.
- Petitioner claims rent for the full 3,940 sq ft for 19 months (Aug 2022 – Mar 2024) amounting to Rs 1,750,783.77.
- Petitioner’s Allegations: No rent was paid despite possession; repeated representations ignored; lack of executed rent agreement is irrelevant as occupation created a statutory/equitable rent obligation.
- Respondents’ Contentions:
- The writ is not maintainable; remedy lies under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982.
- Dispute over actual area occupied: only 1,593.44 sq ft (ground floor) from 01‑08‑2022 and 1,053 sq ft (first floor) from 25‑09‑2022.
- Petitioner delayed registration of a five‑year lease deed, leading to a proposed 11‑month rent agreement that was never accepted.
- On 03‑11‑2023 petitioner’s representative asked BSACS to vacate; premises fully vacated on 29‑08‑2024.
- BSACS paid Rs 1,467,722.33 on 24‑01‑2025 for the area actually occupied, calculated at Rs 22.90 per sq ft.
- Legal Observations: The Court emphasized that Article 226 jurisdiction is appropriate only when the petitioner establishes a lease or rent liability; using writ jurisdiction without a rent agreement constitutes an abuse of process.
Final Outcome
- The writ petition is dismissed.
- The Court directs the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum (e.g., the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act mechanism) for redress of her grievance.
- No monetary award or injunction is granted.
Topics: Rent Dispute, Public Procurement, Judicial Review