IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO.220 OF 2010 Anjana Kshetry & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai & Ors. .. Respondents Ms. N. V. Sanglikar for Petitioners Ms. V. S. Gharpure for Respondents CORAM : J. N. PATEL & A.P. BHANGALE, JJ DATE : 18th MARCH, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard submissions of the respective counsel. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that revision in rateable value from Rs.33,090 to Rs.16,49,165/- NPA, is exorbitant and in violation of principles of natural justice as without special notice served upon members of the Petitioners, the Respondents committed error in holding that, no complaint was filed within 15 days, when in fact the Petitioners had orally objected to the revision of rateable value. 4. The Learned Counsel on behalf of the Respondents opposed the contention of the Petitioners on the ground that the Petitioners can prefer an Appeal against the rateable value revised, in respect of the disputed property. 5. Considering the contention of the Petitioners that no notice was given to the Petitioners before revision of the rateable value and the opportunity of hearing was not granted and also in view of the order brought to our attention passed in M/s. Lal Enterprises & Anr Vs. Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors. in Writ Petition No. 1444 of 2009, decided on 11th August 2009, by division bench of this Court. We are of the opinion that, the Petitioners are entitled for an opportunity of hearing before the Assessing officer of the Respondents. In view of this, we set aside the communication dated 18th June 2009, received by the Petitioners on 8th July 2009 Exhibit- G to the Petition, with direction that the Petitioners will appear before the Assessing officer within two weeks from today, place on record the material in support of the representation / application and the Assessing Officer shall pass an order in accordance with law within 4 weeks from the date of appearance of the Petitioners. In case, the Petitioners are not satisfied with the decision of the Assessing Officer, liberty to them to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 6. We dispose of the Petition in terms of prayer clause (b). Petition is accordingly disposed of. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b), with no order as to costs. ( J. N. Patel, J) (A.P. BHANGALE, J)