1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.309 OF 1998 ... Mahim Ice & Cold Storage Co. ...Petitioners v/s. Bombay Municipal Corporation and another ...Respondents ... Mr.S.Cooper i/b Thakordas & Madgaonkar for the Petitioners. Mrs.S.M.Modale for BMC. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, & R.G.KETKAR, JJ DATED: 17th August, 2009 P.C.: 1. By this petition the Petitioners challenge the show cause notice given by the Corporation for increasing the ratable value of the property of the Petitioners. The grievance of the Petitioners is that though by show cause notice the corporation proposes 2 to increase the ratable value from Rs.6945/- to about Rs.4,00,000/-, no reason is given why the Corporation proposes to increase the ratable value. The Petitioners, after receiving show cause notice approached the authority and sought the reason why the Corporation proposed to increase the ratable value. The Corporation did not supply the reason, instead it revised the ratable value and fixed at Rs.1,25,585/- with effect from 1-4-1995 without ever informing the Petitioners the reason why the ratable value has been increased. 2. The Corporation is served. The Corporation has not filed any reply. The learned Counsel appearing for the Corporation, however, stated before us that the Corporation had proposed to increase the ratable value, because according to the 3 Corporation the property was used as Ice Factory before 1-4-1995, but thereafter it has been used as Auto-Agency and this is the reason why the Corporation proposed to increase the ratable value. In our opinion, when the Corporation proposed to drastically increase the ratable value, it was for the Corporation to indicate in the show cause notice the reason why the Corporation proposed to increase the ratable value, otherwise the very requirement of giving show notice will be defeated. The need for giving show cause notice arises so that the Petitioner gets an opportunity to show cause why ratable value should not be increased. Therefore, unless the Petitioners are informed the reason why the Corporation proposed to increase the ratable value, the Petitioners will not be able to effectively show cause. However, as the learned counsel 4 appearing for the Corporation has disclosed the reason, in our opinion, following order would meet the ends of justice. O R D E R (i)Within a period of three weeks from today the Petitioners shall make a representation against the proposal of the Corporation to increase the ratable value from 1-4-1995 to the Asst.Assessor and Collector, G-North. (ii) The Officer shall, thereafter, grant an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioners and make an order fixing ratable value with effect from 1-4-1995. This shall be done by the Officer as expeditiously as possible, in any case within a period of eight weeks from the date on which the representation is filed by the Petitioners. 5 (iii) Till the Officer makes an order in accordance with law as directed above, interim injunction which is presently operating shall continue to operate. (iv) Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (R.G.KETKAR, J.)