HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 27706 of 2025 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, J. HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed, challenging an order dated 28.03.2023 passed by respondent no. 1. By the said order, respondent no. 1 has held the petitioner entitled to rent for the premises belonging to her and which respondent no. 4 occupied as tenant by holding over from 21.01.2013 to 16.08.2017. 2. The tenancy agreement is dated 28.01.2008 and as per the said agreement, the tenancy was upto 21.01.2013, however, respondent no. 4 continued to occupy the premises till 16.08.2017. The petitioner was paid rent at Rs. 10,553.40/- as was agreed under the agreement even after the lease had expired until the premises was vacated. The request of the petitioner for payment of enhanced amount as rent was declined on the ground that the period of tenancy had expired and there was no written agreement between the parties. Consequently, the petitioner challenged the said order dated 28.03.2018 by filing Writ-C No. 24990 of 2018. This Court held since respondent no. 4 continued to occupy the premises even after expiry of the duration of tenancy, therefore it would be treated to be tenant holding over and would be liable to pay enhanced rent as per Government Order dated 25.11.2011. The matter was remitted back to the State Government for taking a fresh decision vide order dated 29.08.2022. In pursuance thereof, the impugned decision has been taken whereby, the State Government has enhanced the rent from Rs. 10,553/- to Rs. 21,514/- i.e. almost an increase of double the rent originally fixed. The State Government, while fixing the said amount, has placed reliance on the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ranjeet Asthana Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Smt. Meera Devi .....Petitioner(s) The State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) report of ADM (F&R), the Rent Authority, based on prevailing circle rate of Rs. 120 per sq. mtr. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to contend that there was recommendation by the subordinate authorities of the department for paying a higher amount as rent during the said period. He submits that the petitioner was entitled to rent @ Rs. 30,599/- per month. 4. Respondent no. 1 has already taken decision with regard to enhancement of rent. The determination of rent depends on several factors like age of building, location of the premises and rent prevailing in the area. Therefore, in our considered opinion, it cannot be based solely on circle rate. 5. Remedies are provided under common law as well as under the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 for seeking further enhancement of rent, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the fixation of rent by respondent no. 1. Therefore, we find no good ground to entertain the challenge and leave it open to the petitioner to avail the said remedies, if so advised. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. September 15, 2025 A. Mandhani WRIC No. 27706 of 2025 2 (Arun Kumar,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK MANDHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad