C.W.P. No.14641 of 1990 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.14641 of 1990 Date of Decision.03.06.2011 Om Parkash son of Puran Chand, Thana Road, Jagraon, District Ludhiana ......Petitioner Versus The Municipal Committee, Jagraon, District Ludhiana through its Administrator and another .....Respondents 2. C.W.P. No.16782 of 1990 Krishan Lal through LRs and others ......Petitioners Versus The Municipal Committee, Jagraon, District Ludhiana through its Administrator and another .....Respondents Present: Mr. Gurcharan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. IPS Doabia, Advocate for the respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No. -.- K. KANNAN J. 1. The writ petitions contain challenges to the assessment of property tax as being violative of law. The basis of the contentions is that the tax must be assessed on the basis of rental value, which should be ascertained, as it was the manner of determination prescribed under East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. 2. IN C.W.P. NO.14641/1990, the house tax has been assessed at C.W.P. No.14641 of 1990 -2- an annual rental value of Rs.720/- per annum in the year 1985-86. The Municipal Committee enhanced the rental value of Rs.4200/- per annum, which was more than five times to the initial assessment. The petitioner had preferred an appeal to the Additional Deputy Commissioner, who remanded the matter to the Municipal Committee for fresh consideration. The assessment was reduced to Rs.3600/- on 09.01.1989 but in an appeal the order was again set aside and remitted. It was again reduced to Rs.2400/- in the year in the year 1980 vide Annexure P-4 and the appeal filed in the year 1989 was dismissed by the 2nd respondent. It is this order, which is challenged in writ petition before this Court. 3. In C.W.P. No.16782 of 1990, the assessment to property tax has been hovering between return of value of the property at Rs.600/- to Rs.1272/-. In both the cases, the challenge to the assessment is that the assessment violates the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dewan Daulat Rai Kapoor Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee and another AIR 1980 SC 541. The objection taken by the respondent in cases is that the writ petitions have been filed after a delay of more than one and half years after the impugned orders were passed. It is contended that the unit is located in the business centre at the Jagraon and provided with amenities such as pucca road, sewerage etc. As regards the property in C.W.P. No.14641/1990, the contention is that the person actually rented out 8 shops, each of which is 7'x10' and each one of them was itself fetching rent in the range of Rs.300/- to Rs.400/- per month. The potential value of the land and the building are themselves very high and the assessment is not arbitrary. C.W.P. No.14641 of 1990 -3- 4. I do not think it is essential to address the issue of assessment afresh, for, from the year 1990 to till date, there ought to have been several quinquennial revisions. It is too well a principle of law that assessment of property tax which is dependent on the rental value must always be done in the manner of ascertainment of fair rent under the rent restriction enactments. The fair rent, which takes the component of land value also has brought about a situation of higher rental values by the fact of appreciation of values of real estate and particularly the value of the land. None of the assessments made in the year 1980 could be seen excessive. If the increase in tax could be upheld now, it would only be on the basis of exigency. Assessments in few hundreds of rupees as tax payable ought not to be seen as requiring any intervention by this Court after two decades. The proposition, however, remains that in the manner of assessment to property tax dependent on the rental value, the same shall be assessed only in the manner fixed by the Rent Restriction Act. This will govern all the future actions of the Municipality and if the petitioner could dispute the value assessed by the authorities as deviant from the value that could arrive by invoking the said provisions, they shall be entitled to make due representation to the Municipal Committee for appropriate modification. 6. With this observation, the writ petitions are dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE June 03, 2011 Pankaj*