IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16272 of 2009 Rama Shankar Prasad Gupta, Son of Mangru Sah, Resident of Village Pewandi, P.O. and P.S. Chenari, District Rohtas. ----- Petitioner Versus 1. The Rohtas Zila Parishad, Sasaram. 2. The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Rohtas Zila Parishad, Sasaram. ----- Respondents. ----------- 4 23.9.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Nobody appears for the Zila Parishad, Rohtas although copy has been served on Mr. Kamla Kant Pandey who is said to be the advocate for the Zila Parishad, Rohtas. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order contained in Annexure-5 dated 2.9.2009 by which he has been asked to pay a sum of Rs. 12,300/- as dues on account of rent of a shop situated in Chenari Block. The facts are that one Ishwar Chand Prasad was allotted a shop by Zila Parishad in the year 1993. Ishwar Chand Prasad sublet the shop to the petitioner @ Rs. 600/- per month. Subsequently the shop was allotted to the petitioner vide Annexure-1 @ Rs. 1,100/- per month. The petitioner accepted this amount and has been paying Rs. 1,100/- from 2006 upto 2009. An application has been made by the petitioner that the rent fixed by the Zila 2 Parishad is in excess of the rent that has been fixed for the shops situated in the vicinity which belong to the Zila Parishad. It is submitted that there are 27 shops belonging to the Zila Parishad which are situated in the same market. The Zila Parishad realizes rent @ Rs. 340/- per month from the other 26 shops, whereas, the petitioner has been asked to pay a rent of Rs. 1,100/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the rent is excessive, and that he is being subject to discrimination by being asked to pay a higher rent than those persons who are similarly situated to the petitioner. This Court has no way of knowing the circumstances under which the rent has fixed at Rs. 1,100/-, nor can the Court come to a definite finding that the Zila Parishad has fixed the rent at Rs. 340/- for the other shop holders, as such, this Court directs the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Rohtas Zila Parishad to pass appropriate orders after considering all the facts as pointed out by this Court. The petitioner will file a fresh application along with a copy of this order within a period of 3 one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Rohtas Zila Parishad (respondent no. 2) will pass an order within a period of three months thereafter. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Till decision by the respondent no. 2, the petitioner should not be evicted from the shop, which direction is really by way of abundant caution because he can only be evicted after following the due procedure under the law. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)