IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.344 of 2010 Tapan Kumar Banerjee @ Tapan Banerjee son of late Nalini Ranjan Banerjee, resident of Mohalla-Kila, Raj Compund, Bettiah, P.O. & P.S. Bettiah, District- West Champaran. --Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2.The Collector, West Champaran at Bettiah 3.The Sub Divisional Officer-cum-House Control, Bettiah, District West Champaran 4.The Bettiah Estate under Court of Yards through its Manager, Bettiah, P.O. & P.S. Bettiah, District- West Champaran.--- Respondents ----------- 4. 27.6.2011. Heard Mr. Bashishth Narayan Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Sandeep Singh, learned Assisting Counsel to G.P.4 appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.1.2009 passed by the respondent no.2 the Collector, West Champaran, Bettiah in R.M.Case No.69 of 2000/2001 confirming the order dated 10.5.2000 passed by the respondent no.3 Sub Divisional Officer-cum House Controller, West Champaran, Bettiah passed in H.C.Case No.108 HC/97 fixing and enhancing the rent of the area of 4.1/2 decimals leased out by the Bettiah Estate and in occupation of the petitioner from Rs.75/- per month to Rs.800/- per month. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on the Agreement entered between the Bettiah Estate and the present petitioner, submits that an area of 4.1/2 decimal land pertaining to Khesra No.6366 and 6367 (wrongly mentioned in Annexure-1 as 5366 and 5377), was leased out to the petitioner as fully described in the Schedule of the Agreement placed at Annexure-4. He submits that subsequently, a residential house was constructed thereon and in which the petitioner is living peacefully and paying rent of the area as per the agreement. He submits that subsequently on a misconception of law, an application was filed under the provisions of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982, hereinafter referred to as ‘BBC Act’ before the House Controller, Bettiah giving rise to HC Case No.108 HC/97 for enhancement of rent, by the Bettiah Estate and the House Controller respondent no.3, vide order dated 10.5.2000 contained in memo dated 26.5.2000, fixed the rent of the area including the residential construction situated over the land leased out to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.800/- per 3 month. The order of the House Controller was challenged vide R.M.Case No.69/2000-2001 before the Collector, Bettiah and which was dismissed and the order passed by the House Controller was upheld. Learned counsel for respondent no.4, i.e the Bettiah Estate, though served has not filed appearance in the present proceedings either on 20.6.2011 or even today. Learned counsel for the petitioner raises a very short issue in the light of a judicial pronouncement of this Court reported in 1993 (1) PLJR 524 (M/s Ashok Chitra Private Limited Vs. the State of Bihar and others). He submits that admittedly a vacant piece of land was leased out to the petitioner. He submits that no proceeding under the BBC Act can be initiated in relation to a vacant piece of land and which issue stands determined under the judicial pronouncement referred to above. He thus submits that in view of the Division Bench judgment, the impugned orders as contained in Annexures-1 and 2 are unsustainable in law. The legal position is not disputed by the learned counsel for the State. 4 That being the position, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 15.1.2009 passed in R.M.Case No.69 of 2000- 2001 by the Collector, West Champaran, Bettiah and the order dated 10.5.2000 passed in HC Case No.108 HC/97 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer-cum-House Controller, West Champaran, Bettiah as contained in Annexures-1 and 2 respectively are quashed and set aside. There, however, shall be no order as to cost. ahk (Jyoti Saran, J.)