Rent control: A law that exists only on paper
Picture this: your landlord knocks at the door and casually announces that the rent is going up starting next month. No discussion, no explanation. Or maybe your landlord tells you to leave within days without any prior notice. Perhaps you've been asked to pay two or three months' rent in advance just to move in.
For many tenants across major cities and towns, these situations are quite normal. On paper, the Premises Rent Control Act, 1991 promises protection from such abuses. In reality, landlords often ignore the law, tenants do not know their rights, and enforcement is almost nonexistent, creating a crisis that underlines not just tenants' rights but also the stability of the housing sector. The act, for example, prohibits sudden rent increases except when the landlord has made genuine improvements to the property and the increase is approved by the Rent Controller. Section 23 of the act also makes it illegal to take more than a one-month deposit without the controller's approval. However, many tenants report paying far more than that. Likewise, eviction without prior notice is also barred, which is often ignored, forcing families to move out.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. 
Researchers thus find a significant gap between the law and its implementation. Many tenants remain unaware of their rights, or even the law itself. A 2017 BIGD study found that only 15 percent of renters in Dhaka knew about the existence of a rent controller, the official responsible for resolving disputes over rent or eviction cases. In Chattogram and Sylhet, as per another study, about half of the tenants had no knowledge of the act, and even those who knew were mostly unaware of their rights. These renters, typically from middle- or lower-income households, are often victimised by their landlords, highlighting how legal protections can come undone by the lack of awareness or enforcement.
The lack of legal awareness is manifested in other ways. The BIGD study, for instance, found that only 27 percent of tenants signed a formal rental contract. Among those who did not, only six percent asked for a contract. Worse, 85 percent of Dhaka tenants paid rent without getting any receipt. Without a contract or receipt, tenants have no evidence to support their rights in court. In Chattogram and Sylhet, the situation is more or less similar.
With little documentation and limited awareness, any legal case can drag on for years. As the 2016 study on Chattogram and Sylhet shows, only about 100 rent cases were filed each year, and fewer than 15 percent were resolved. Many cases take three to four years to decide, and some stretch on for over a decade. Meanwhile, tenants continue to face unauthorised rent hikes. In Dhaka, 75 percent of renters reported annual increases, often without any justification being provided, apart from vague references to inflation or market demand.
The financial burden thus imposed on tenants is significant. According to one study, 82 percent of households in Dhaka spend more than 30 percent of their income on rent. Half of these families have to cut back on other essential expenses to cover their rent. With property prices and home loans increasingly out of reach, many have no option but to rent under any conditions. Tenants often accept unfair terms and pay higher rents simply to remain close to their workplace or their children's school.
The question is, why is the government failing to regulate this vital sector, when, by all indications, it is clear that average house rent is rising faster than the average income growth? One may recall that a High Court ruling in 2015 ordered the government to address arbitrary rent increases. It also recommended forming a commission to set area-wise rent ceilings. These rulings are being rendered ineffective because of the lack of enforcement.
The Legal Aid Services (Amendment) Ordinance, 2025, which came into effect in July this year, now requires landlords and tenants in rent-control cases to try mandatory mediation before going to court. The government thinks such mediation will help settle disputes more easily and quickly. Experts also believe many rent issues can be resolved through discussion, which could reduce court backlogs. However, critics warn that with few legal aid offices and limited staff, routing every case through mediation might overwhelm the system and delay urgent help, such as in case of tenant evictions. Given the rent control act's history of weak enforcement and slow proceedings, mediation alone is unlikely to make justice faster or fairer.
Against this backdrop, it is important that the relevant law is further strengthened and updated. Activists want local rent offices staffed with trained employees, official rent charts for neighbourhoods, and an easy registration system. Many also call for a national rent commission to regulate the sector. It is also important that tenants receive written contracts and rent receipts to help them defend their rights in court. Faster dispute resolution, real penalties for offenders, and proper enforcement of rent rules are crucial to address the plight of tenants in Bangladesh's expanding urban landscape.
Shilajit Kumar Roy is a lecturer of law and human rights at R.P. Shaha University, Narayanganj.
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.
Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries, and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.
Comments