VEHARI, Dec 14: Around 1,000 per cent increase in the rent by the Evacuee Trust Property Board (ETPB) has created unrest among occupants of its land in various parts of the district.

The board has issued notices to more than 1,500 families in various parts of the district, including D-block, B-block, C-block, Vehari, Mailsi and Burewala, to pay the rent or face eviction.

Tenants Association spokesmen Jan Mohammad and Rana Sarwar said here on Wednesday that the board had been charging Rs2 per marla in 1990. It increased the rent in 1994 to Rs7 per marla. In 1998 it had published a notice in the press about the proposed increase in the rent which was opposed by the tenants.

They said they have been living in these localities since 1948 and paying rent regularly. According to rules, the board was bound to increase the rent by 10 per cent every year.

They alleged that some officials were demanding bribe from them for pending their rent cases.

They said the board authorities did not provide them any facilities, including repairing and whitewashing of the building. According to rules, the board was bound to repair them but it did nothing as a result of which most of them have been declared dangerous for residence, they claimed.

They asked the board chairman to withdraw the increase in the rent immediately.

When contacted, Multan zone administrator Jawed Basher said maximum increase proposed by the department was 200 per cent and not 1,000 per cent on residential and commercial buildings and shops. The rent on two-marla residential land has been written-off while no increase has been made on five marlas residences.

The board proposed 200 per cent increase in above five marlas residences and commercial buildings and shops with the consent of the tenants, he claimed.

He said the board introduced new rent policy this year.

He said if tenants disagreed with the proposed increase in rent, they could file appeal to the area administrator and till the decision of the appeal, the department would receive old rent from them.

He claimed that the board would not take any decision or step without the consent of the tenants.

However, the tenants disagreed with this claim.