1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NOS. 1081/1993 & 3748/1995 Writ Petition No. 1081/1993 Shetkari Sahakari Ginning Oil Mills, Katol, a cooperative society having its establishment and office at Katol, Tahsil Katol, Distt. Nagpur. ... ... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. State of Maharashtra through its its Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Bombay-32. 2. Tahsildar Katol, Distt. Nagpur. 3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Katol, District Nagpur. ... ... RESPONDENTS Writ Petition No. 3748/1995 1. Harsukh Dayal Mehta, Aged about 65 years, Occupation Business, 2. Dulichand (Dead) through L.Rs. Pradeepkumar Dulichand Mehta, aged about 37 years, Occupation Business, 3. Dharmendrakumar Harsukhlal Mehta, aged about 27 years, 4. Pradeepkumar Dulichand Mehta, aged about 37 years, 2 5. Sau. Jaswantabai Harsukhlal Mehta, aged about 50 years, Occupation Household, 6. Anusayabai wd/o Dulichand Mehta, aged about 65 years, Occupation Household, 7. Sau. Harshabai w/o Pradipkumar Mehta, aged about 32 years, Occupation Household, All residents of Shegaon, Housing Society, Shegaon, Tq. Shegaon, District Buldhana. ... ... PETITIONERS  VERSUS - 1. The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Revenue and Forest Department, Mantralaya, Bombay-32. 2. The Collector, Buldhana. 3. The Tahsildar, Shegaon, District Buldhana. ... ... RESPONDENTS Mr. R.J. Kankale, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. N.S. Khubalkar, A.G.P., for the respondents. CORAM : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J. DATED : APRIL 17, 2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Since common issues are involved in these two writ petitions, they are disposed of by this common judgment. Heard Shri Kankale for the petitioners, and Shri Khubalkar, the learned A.G.P., for the respondents. 3 2. According to the counsel for the petitioners, the respondents were not entitled to issue the demand notices and pass an order against the petitioners for paying the non-agricultural assessment at the revised rate with effect from 1/8/1979. The counsel for the petitioners relied on the ratio laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment reported in 1992 Mh.L.J. 1327 (State of Maharashtra & ors. Vs. Nirlon Synthetic Fibres and Chemicals Ltd. and another) and unreported judgment in Writ Petition No. 2341/1988, dated 14th August, 2003, whereby this Court had quashed and set aside the notices issued by the respondents seeking assessment at the revised rates with effect from 1/8/1979 and held that the revised rates could be made applicable only from the date of expiry of the guarantee period. 3. The cases of the petitioners are squarely covered by the aforesaid decisions and in view of the ratio laid down therein, the impugned notices and the orders upholding them, are hereby quashed and set aside. The revenue authorities would, however, be at liberty to revise the assessment after the expiry of the guarantee period in accordance with law after issuing a notice to the petitioners 4 in that regard. 4. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to costs. (Smt. Vasanti A. Naik) JUDGE RMP