ORDER : Nagesh Bheemapaka, J. The case of Petitioner is that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the building bearing H.No.2-4- 123/A/12/2 situated at Padmavathi Colony, Swaroop Nagar, Uppal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana State. He has been leasing his buildings to Respondent authorities for welfare activities for several years. In 2007, Respondent authorities had taken on lease another building belonging to Petitioner for the purpose of running an SC Child Beggar Home and fixed the rent at Rs.10/- per square foot. According to Petitioner, Respondent authorities paid rent regularly and without default till the month of September, 2017. 1.1. It is stated, the said building gradually became old and dilapidated and was rendered unfit for continued occupation. In view of the unsafe condition, Respondent authorities shifted SC Child Beggar Home from the earlier premises to Petitioner's new building bearing H.No.2-4- 123/A/12/2 during July/August, 2018. It is contended, even prior to such shifting, Respondents failed to pay rent from October, 2017 to July, 2018. After shifting into the new building with effect from 01.08.2018, Respondents continued to occupy the premises without paying any rent whatsoever. It is stated, after the hostel was shifted to the new building, petitioner made several representations to Respondent authorities requesting to revise and fix the rent at Rs.18/- by modifying the earlier rate of Rs. 10/- per square foot, taking into consideration the prevailing rental value in the locality. The total area of the building is approximately 4,800 square feet. Petitioner asserts that despite repeated representations, Respondents neither revised nor paid rent due from 01.08.2018 onwards. 1.2. Petitioner further assails the notice dated 24.10.2021 issued by the 2 nd Respondent, wherein rent was unilaterally fixed at Rs.10/- per square foot for 3,700 square feet with effect from 01.08.2018, and directions were simultaneously issued to vacate the building immediately. In the said notice, it is stated, rent would be paid to Petitioner only after receipt of budget from the Commissioner, SCDD, Telangana, Hyderabad. The said notice was issued abruptly, without affording any opportunity of hearing, and without considering her earlier representations, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. 1.3. It is further stated that without settling the arrears of rent payable from 01.08.2018, Respondent authorities vacated the premises on 26.10.2021 and issued a letter through the Hostel Welfare Officer informing about vacation. The said notice was issued abruptly, without affording any opportunity of hearing, and without considering her earlier representations, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. 1.3. It is further stated that without settling the arrears of rent payable from 01.08.2018, Respondent authorities vacated the premises on 26.10.2021 and issued a letter through the Hostel Welfare Officer informing about vacation. Petitioner thereafter, submitted the representation dated 28.10.2021 requesting the Respondent authorities to pay the rent by fixing the rate at Rs 18/- per square foot, taking into account the prevailing rental value and the rent fixed for similarly situated private buildings. The said representation has not been considered till date. 1.4. Petitioner places reliance on G.O.Ms. No 186 Finance (EBS X) Department dated 22.12.2017, wherein instructions were issued to the Welfare Departments to fix rent for private buildings taken on lease based on the prevailing rental value in each District. He also relies upon the proceedings of the Additional Collector, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, dated 01.07.2021, wherein rent was fixed at Rs.17.50 per square foot for a private building occupied for Government SC College Boys Hostel at Jeedimetla, situated in the same District. Despite the said Government Order and the fixation made by the Additional Collector in the same District, Respondents failed to extend similar treatment to her building, thereby acting in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner 1.5. Petitioner states that the continued non-payment of rent from October, 2017 onwards, unilateral fixation of rent at Rs. 10/- per square foot, failure to consider representations, and the act of vacating the premises on 26.10.2021 without clearing the arrears of rent are illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of the principles of natural justice. The Petitioner submits that he has no other effective or alternative remedy except to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. 2. This Court, by order dated 16.11.2021, directed the respondent authorities to pay arrears of rent from 01.08.2018 to petitioner, as per the order dated 01.07.2021 of respondent No.4 forthwith. 3. Respondent No.2 filed counter denying the allegations made by Petitioner. It is stated that the SC Child Beggar Home, which was earlier functioning in the old building belonging to Petitioner, was shifted to his new building with effect from 01.08.2018 due to emergent and unavoidable circumstances. 3. Respondent No.2 filed counter denying the allegations made by Petitioner. It is stated that the SC Child Beggar Home, which was earlier functioning in the old building belonging to Petitioner, was shifted to his new building with effect from 01.08.2018 due to emergent and unavoidable circumstances. During the relevant period, heavy rains caused water to enter the old building, rendering it unsafe and uninhabitable, and that electricity supply to the old premises was also disconnected. In view of these exigencies, the hostel inmates were required to be shifted immediately to ensure their safety and welfare. 3.1. It is stated, shifting of SC Child Beggar Home to Petitioner's new building was done with the oral permission of the Assistant SC Development Officer, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, and that the same was not an unauthorised or clandestine act. After the shifting came to the notice of the higher authorities, explanations were called for from the In- charge Superintendent of the hostel for having shifted the inmates without obtaining prior written approval who submitted explanation justifying the action on the ground of the emergent situation and the unsafe condition of the old building. 3.2. Thereafter, inspections were conducted by the Assistant SC Development Officer and by the Executive Engineer (R&B), Medchal, to assess the suitability of the new building and to determine the extent of usable area. The Executive Engineer (R&B), Medchal, assessed the usable carpet area strictly in accordance with the norms prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.63 dated 18.04.2011 and determined that the area actually occupied and used for the hostel was 3,700 square feet. Over a period of time, the strength of inmates in the SC Child Beggar Home was reduced and that subsequently, due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the hostel remained closed from 25.03.2020 onwards. In these circumstances, the requirement to continue the hostel in Petitioner's building ceased. 3.3. It is further contended that pursuant to the instructions of the Additional Collector, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, a Committee was constituted for the purpose of fixing reasonable rent for the private building occupied by the Government. The said Committee met on 08.09.2021, examined the relevant factors including the usable carpet area, condition of the building and prevailing norms, thereafter, fixed the rent at Rs.10/- per square foot for the used carpet area of 3,700 square feet. The committee also issued a reasonableness certificate certifying the said rate of rent. The said Committee met on 08.09.2021, examined the relevant factors including the usable carpet area, condition of the building and prevailing norms, thereafter, fixed the rent at Rs.10/- per square foot for the used carpet area of 3,700 square feet. The committee also issued a reasonableness certificate certifying the said rate of rent. Based on the decision of the committee and issuance of reasonableness certificate, directions were issued to vacate the building, and accordingly, the SC Child Beggar Home vacated Petitioner's premises on 26.10.2021. Respondent No.2 submits that vacation was carried out strictly in accordance with the administrative decision taken by the competent authorities. 3.4. Respondent No.2 further contends that Petitioner had, during the course of correspondence and discussions, expressed his willingness to accept rent at Rs. 10/- per square foot, therefore, the arrears of rent, if any, are payable only at the said rate. It is specifically asserted that Petitioner cannot now resile from the said willingness and seek enhancement of rent through writ proceedings. It is also stated, reliance placed by Petitioner on fixation of rent at Rs.17.50 per square foot for another building at Jeedimetla is misconceived and impermissible, as fixation of rent depends upon several factors such as location, condition, extent of usable area and assessment by the competent committee, and no automatic parity can be claimed merely because the building is situated in the same District. 3.5. Respondent No.2 further states that payment of arrears of rent has been delayed only due to non-release of budget by the Government and not on account of any mala fide intention. Respondents are ready and willing to pay the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 10/- per square foot for the occupied area of 3,700 square feet upon receipt of the necessary funds from the Government. Respondent No.2 therefore, contends that Writ Petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed 4. Heard Sri R.A. Chary, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare on behalf of Respondents 1, 2 and 5 and learned Government Pleader for Revenue on behalf of Respondents 3 and 4. 5. Respondent No.2 therefore, contends that Writ Petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed 4. Heard Sri R.A. Chary, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare on behalf of Respondents 1, 2 and 5 and learned Government Pleader for Revenue on behalf of Respondents 3 and 4. 5. A perusal of the material on record and the arguments of learned counsel makes it clear that the dispute in this Writ Petition arises out of the occupation of Petitioner's building by Respondent authorities for running an SC Child Beggar Home and fixation of rent for such occupation. While Petitioner claims entitlement to fixation of rent at a higher rate based on prevailing rental value and comparable instances, Respondents justify fixation of rent at a lower rate based on committee assessment and administrative norms. 6. At the outset, it is not in dispute that Petitioner is the owner of the building bearing H.No.2-4-123/A/12/2 and Respondents occupied the said building from 01.08.2018 till 26.10.2021. It is also not in dispute that rent has not been paid to Petitioner for the said period. These admitted facts form foundation of the present dispute. Petitioner placed reliance on G.O.Ms.No.186 dated 22.12.2017 and the proceedings dated 01.07.2021 of the Additional Collector, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, wherein rent of Rs.17.50 per square foot was fixed for another private building in the same District. Petitioner contends that denial of similar fixation in her case is arbitrary and discriminatory. On the other hand, Respondents contend that fixation of rent is an administrative function to be carried out by a duly constituted committee, taking into account factors such as usable area, condition of the building and prevailing norms, and that the committee in the present case fixed the rent at Rs. 10/- per square foot for 3,700 square feet of usable carpet area. 7. Fixation of rent for private buildings taken on lease by the Government, undoubtedly, involves factual assessment and administrative discretion. In exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, this Court cannot sit in appeal over such administrative determinations or substitute its own assessment for that of the competent authority, unless the decision is shown to be arbitrary, perverse or in violation of statutory provisions. In exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, this Court cannot sit in appeal over such administrative determinations or substitute its own assessment for that of the competent authority, unless the decision is shown to be arbitrary, perverse or in violation of statutory provisions. Mere existence of another instance of higher rent fixation in the same District does not, by itself, confer a right to claim parity, particularly when fixation in the present case is shown to have been made by a committee after inspection and assessment 8. At the same time, the Court cannot lose sight of the fact that Respondents admittedly occupied Petitioner's building for a considerable period and that rent has not been paid for such occupation. Budgetary constraints or delay in release of funds cannot justify non-payment of rent for admitted use of private property. The right of the State to occupy private premises carries with it a corresponding obligation to pay rent in a timely manner, and failure to do so would amount to arbitrary exercise of power. 9. Petitioner has also assailed the notice dated 24.10.2021 on the ground that it was issued without affording an opportunity of hearing. While Respondents justify issuance of the notice based on committee decision and administrative necessity, it is evident that fixation of rent and the direction to vacate were communicated simultaneously. However, having regard to the fact that building has already been vacated on 26.10.2021, the issue now survives primarily with respect to payment of arrears of rent rather than continuation of occupation. 10. The contention of Respondents that Petitioner expressed willingness to accept rent at Rs. 10/- per square foot is a matter of record in counter affidavit. Petitioner, however, continues to assert her claim for a higher rate. This Court refrains from entering into disputed questions as to the nature and extent of such willingness, as such issues would require examination of factual material beyond the scope of writ jurisdiction. 11. On a holistic consideration of the pleadings, this Court is of the view that while Petitioner is not entitled to a mandamus directing fixation of rent at Rs.17.50 or Rs.18 per square foot, Respondents are under a clear obligation to pay rent for the period during which the building was admittedly occupied, at the rate fixed by the competent committee. On a holistic consideration of the pleadings, this Court is of the view that while Petitioner is not entitled to a mandamus directing fixation of rent at Rs.17.50 or Rs.18 per square foot, Respondents are under a clear obligation to pay rent for the period during which the building was admittedly occupied, at the rate fixed by the competent committee. Continued withholding of such payment on the ground of non-release of budget cannot be sustained in law. The balance of equities therefore, requires that administrative determination of rent be respected, while at the same time ensuring that Petitioner is not left uncompensated for the use of his property. 12. The Writ Petition is therefore, allowed in part. Respondents are directed to pay arrears of rent to Petitioner at Rs. 10/- per square foot for the occupied area of 3,700 square feet from 01.08.2018 till 26.10.2021, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The claim of Petitioner for enhancement of rent beyond the rate fixed by the competent committee stands rejected. No costs. 13. Pending miscellaneous Applications, if any, shall stand closed.