r ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) CIVIL REVISION N0. ^ z—/2007 UNDER SECTION 392 OF THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1956 PETITIONER: € ^ .Mahendra Kumar Alias Mohanlal ^Jain, aged about 41 years, s/o Gujar r' Mal Jain, Cloth Merchant, ,r/o Ward No. 26, Sadar Bazaar, Durg, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS: ~7~ <L^ Municipal Corporation Durg, through it?s Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Durg, District Durg (C.G.) HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CIVIL REVISION 32 OF 2007 Iy PETITIONER RESPONDENT ^^11. Mahendra Kumar alias Mohanlal Jain Versus Municipal Corporation, Durg. ORDER Postfor / -2-2011 Sd/- N- K. Agarwal Judge ^-2-2011 ^S-t^^ HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT^ILASPUR n ^ CIVIL REVISION 32 OF 2007 PETITIONER RESPONDENT Mahendra Kumar alias Mohanlal Jain Versus Municipal Corporation, Durg. REYISIQN_UNDER SECTION 392 OF THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT. 1956 (Sm&IeBench: Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Asarwal, J.) Present : Shri Alok Bakhshi, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Sanjay K Agrawal with Shri Sourabh Shanna, Advocates for respondent. ORDER (Passed onj_/02/2011) 1. Legality and propriety ofthe order dated 19.12.1989, passed by the District Judge, Durg, in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 16/89, whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant under Section 149 ofthe Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (for short '.the Act') has been rejected and the order dated 06.02.1989, passed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Durg, has been upheld, is under assail in this revision. 2. The facts giving rise to this revision are that: the applicant purchased a house at Gwalipara, Ward No. 26, Durg, vide registered sale deed dated 15.04.82. Old house was assessed to property tax @ 90.12 rupees per year. Old house was demolished, new house was constructed after obtaining sanction from the respondenV corporation. The respondent issued a notice under Section 144 of the Act on 24'.01.86, asking applicant to fumish infonnation in the proforma attached to above notice. The applicant fumished the above information on 31.01.86. On 25.08.87, a bill was presented to the applicant demanding Rs. 12,545.60 as property tax ofthe year 1986-87 and 1987-88 under Section 173 oftheAct. The applicant raised an objection on 03.09.87. Vide order dated 06.02.89, the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Durg, dismissed tlie abov.e objection and an appeal preferred there-against by the applicant under Section 149 ofthe Act was dismissed by the District Judge, Durg vide order impugned dated 19.12.1989. Hence this re\ ir>ion. Shri Alok Bakhshi, leamed counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the property tax has been assessed without following the mandatory provisions ofissuing notice under Section 146 of the Act; without considering and deciding the objections raised by the petitioner, the same has been assessed only on the basis of survey report which is inadmissible, and the leamed District Judge, Durg, has also affirmed the order passed by the Commissioner without appreciating the contentions ofthe applicant, and, the order impugned for assessment of property tax deserves to be set aside. On the other hand, Shri Sanjay K Agrawal, leamed counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that no notice is required under Section 146 ofthe Act. The property tax was assessed after giving due opportunity of hearing to the applicant ahd after considering the objections raised by him. The Commissioner has rightly dismissed the objection raised by the applicant, the District Judge, Durg, has also rightly dismissed the appeal and the order impugned deserves to be upheld. ^ ^t ,^:,Ai!s!^ ffcili^l 1 5. I have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and pemsed the order impugned. 6. The point for consideration before this court is whether cf not the property tax has been assessed in accordance with law after affording due opportunity ofhearing to the applicant. 7. As per scheme of the Act, for the imposition of property tax, owner and/or, occupier of land or building is required to fumish information regarding name and place of abode of the owner or occupier of such land or building and regarding measurement or the gross annual rent or revenue or the description or other specified details or the actual cost or estimated market value of such land or building. 8. As per Section 145 (1) ofthe Act, after completing the valuation of land and buildings in any ward under Section 143 of the Act, the Commissioner shall cause the respective valuations to be entered in a list and give public notice of the place where such list may be inspected. As per Section 145 (2), the Commissioner shdil at the same time and in the same manner, give public notice of a date, not being less then thirty days from the publication of such notice by which objections to the amount of any annual value or other particulars entered in the assessment list may be delivered at his office. 9. Under Section 146 ofthe Act, the Commissioner shall, in allcases in which any land'or building is for the first time valued, or ih which the valuation of any land or building previously valued as increased under Section 143 give special notice thereof, to the occupier ofthe (; ^\ same, and when the valuation is so increased, the said notice shall contain a statement ofgrounds ofthe increase. Under Section 147 of the Act, any person dissatisfied with the valuation made under this chapter may deliver at the municipal office a written notice stating the grounds of his objection of such valuation. Further, as per Section 147 (2), notice shall be delivered on or before the date fixed in this behalfin the public notice referred to in Section 145 or 146 ofthe Act. 10. Section 148 of the Act provides that all such objections shall be entered in a register to be maintained for the purpose and, on receipt of any objection; the Commissioner shall give a notice in writing to the objector of the time and place at which his objection will be investigated. Under Section 148 (3), when the objection h<as been determined, the order passed on such objection shall be recorded in the said register and, if necessary, an amendment made in the assessment list in accordance with the result oftheobjection. Under Section 149, the liability ofany land or building to assessment or as to the basis or principle of assessment or as to the amount of tax assessed, an appeal shall lie from the decision of the Municipal Commissioner to the District Judge, whose decision shall be final, and Section 150 provides every valuation made by the Commissioner under Section 143 shall subject to the provisions of Sections 148 'and 149 be fmal. Under Section 151, the annual value fixed under this.chapter shall be entered in one or more registers to be kept ward-wise or in any other manner. n f\ 11. Section 152 provides when objections have been determined and appeals disposed of and the entries required by section, 151 have been made, the assessment list shall be authenticated by the Commissioner, who shall certify under his signature that except in the cases in which amendments have been made as shown therein, no valid objection has been made to the annual values entered in the said list. Further, Section 153 empowers the Commissioner to amend the assessment list by the inclusion, omission or substitution ofany matter. As per Section 173, when any amount declared by or under the provisions of this Act to be recoverable in the manner provided in this chapter, or payable on account of any tax imposed within the limits of the city shall have become due, the Commissioner shall with the least practicable delay cause to be presented to any person liable for the payment thereof a bill for the sum claimed as due. As per Sectipn 173 (2), every such bill shall specify the period for which and the property, occupation or thing in respect of which the sum is claimed, and shall also give notice of the liability incurred in default of payment and the time within which an objection may be preferred as against such claim. 12. Now, reverting to the facts ofthe case, it would be clear that neither public notice was given under Section 145, nor notice under Section 146 ofthe Act has been sent to the applicant mentioning therein how and in what manner the property tax has been assessed. Section 146 of the Act has 'two parts; one is regarding valuation of land or byilding which is valued for the fist time and the other part is regarding valuation ofany land or building previously valued but the 'l :;;^^ 1 ^ '.^'-.,-^' 4 valuation has been increased under Section 143 ofthe Act. Neither public notice was issued under Section 145 ofthe Act nor special notice under Section 146 ofthe Act has been sent to the applicant and there was no occasion for the applicant to prefer an objection under Sectionl47 ofthe Act. It is not correct to say that cases in which assessment is to be made for the first time, Section 146 ofthe Act has no application. 13. It appears that since no notice was sent under Sections 145 and 146 of the Act, there was no occasion for the Commissioner to investigate in to the objection under Section 148 ofthe act. 14. The respondent corporation is bound to give statement pf grounds of assessment of property tax. The objection raised herein by the applicant was in-fact against the notice sent by the respondent under Section 173 ofthe Act and not under Section 147 oftheAct, as no notice was sent under Sections 14S or 146 ofthe Act, and therefore, the tax was assessed and entered into the list under Section 151 of the Act and authenticated by the Commissioner under Section 152 without following the procedure prescribed under Section 148 ofthe Act. These aspects of the matter have not been considered by the District Judge, Durg, while hearing the appeal. 15. No tax can be imposed without affording proper opportunity of hearing in terms of statutory provisions. Giving of notice under Section 146 and investigation ofthe objection raised under Section 147 ofthe Act is'not an empty formality but a mandatory duty is cast upon the Commissioner to hear and determine the objections. Nothing has been done in the instant case, and therefore, in the considered opinion of this court, the impugned order of assessment ofproperty tax being passed in contravention ofprovisions oflaw is illegal and deser^es to be quashed. 16. In view of above, the impugned order of assessment of Property Tax is quashed. The Municipal Corporation, Durg, shall decide the objection ofthe applicant afresh in terms ofSection 148ofthe Act after affording an opportunity to the objector/applicant to substantiate his objections by placing the evidence documetltary or oral, and thereafiter shall determine the amount of property tax for the year 1986-87 and 87-88. No order as to costs. Sahu Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge