IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16875 of 2009 1. SUBHA JHA W/O SRI MAHANAND JHA R/O MOHALLA- ADAMPUR, P.S.- KOTWALI, IN THE TOWN AND DISTRICT OF BHAGALPUR. [LANDLADY] Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER, BHAGALPUR DIVISION, BHAGALPUR 3. THE COLLECTOR, BHAGALPUR 4. THE HOUSE CONTROLLER-CUM-SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SADAR, BHAGALPUR 5. THE ANCHALADHIKARI, JAGDISHPUR, BHAGALPUR 6. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, SUB-REGIONAL OFFICE, ADAMPUR CHOWK, BHAGALPUR [TENANT] ----------- 2/ 10/12/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, for the State and for the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Bhagalpur. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 3.9.2009 passed by the Commissioner, Bhagalpur in House Control Revision Case No.1/08-09. It sets aside the order of the Collector, Bhagalpur dated 27.12.2007 in House Control Appeal No.1/03-04. The District Magistrate refused to interfere with the orders of the House Controller-cum- S.D.O., Sadar, Bhagalpur in House Control Case No.5/97 fixing fair rent at the rate of Rs.5.47 per sq.ft. for the premises in question which has been reduced to Rs.4.70 per sq.ft. by the Commissioner in the revision. The petitioner specifically asserts in paragraph-11 of the writ application that the revision application before the Commissioner was filed much after the period of limitation had expired and that it was not accompanied by - 2 - any petition for condonation of delay, the Commissioner also did not pass any order condoning the delay. Learned Counsel for the Provident Fund Commissioner from the counter affidavit filed on its behalf dealing with paragraph-11 to the writ application in reply at paragraph-17 does not deny the specific and categorical statement of fact made by the petitioners. No further discussion is required. If the revision was barred by limitation, and it was not accompanied by any application for condonation of delay, the revision itself was not maintainable. The Commissioner had no jurisdiction to entertain the revision and then proceed to pass final orders. This Court therefore holds that the order of the Commissioner dated 3.9.2009 is a nullity. The matter stands concluded by the order of the Collector in House Control Appeal No.1/03-04. Let the Provident Fund Department deposit pay all the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.5.47 per sq.ft. as held by the House Controller-cum-S.D.O., Sadar, Bhagalpur within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/presentation of a copy of this order. The application stands allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)