IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 16476 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION: February 11, 2009 M/s Sham Bagh Palace .........PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and Others ......RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA Present: Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. H.S. Brar, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate, for respondent no. 3-caveator. AJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL) This civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing order dated 24.03.2000 Annexure P-1 passed by House Tax Sub Committee of Municipal Corporation, Patiala and order dated 25.08.2008 Annexure P-11 passed by Commissioner, Jalandhar Division. Facts in brief are that under order Annexure P-1 dated 24.03.2000, the petitioner was assessed for the purposes of house tax and was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 3,75,788/-. The petitioner, aggrieved by the order carried an appeal under Section 146 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (for short The Act). The appeal was allowed vide C.W.P. No. 16476 of 2008 -2- order Annexure P-3 dated 17.03.2005. The house tax was assessed at Rs. 25,920/-. Order Annexure P-1 was set aside. The respondent Municipal Corporation filed a review application which has been dismissed on 17.03.2005 vide order Annexure P-3. The corporation thereafter filed civil writ petition bearing no. 5311 of 2006 titled Municipal Corporation, Patiala Vs. M/s. Sham Bagh Palace and Another in challenge to order passed by the Appellate Authority and the order passed on review application. This Court while deciding the matter on 15.12.2006, took note of the fact that the petitioner had not deposited the tax assessed which was a condition precedent under provisions of Section 147 of the Act and, therefore, the appeal could be heard only on deposit of the amount of house tax that was sought to be challenged by the petitioner. Order passed by this Court has been placed on record as Annexure P-5. The petitioner made a deposit of Rs. 3,49,868/- i.e. the amount assessed by the assessing authority minus the accepted house tax amount of Rs. 25,920/-, which had already been deposited. An application was made for restoration of the appeal in terms of the High Court order. The application has been placed on record as Annexure P-7. Vide order Annexure P-8, the Commissioner Patiala Division, Patiala has required the petitioner to make deposit of the entire amount due till 2006-07 i.e. Rs. 63,34,442/-. The petitioner filed an application for recalling order Annexure P- 8 and for stay of requirement of deposit of the amount due till the year 2006-07. Vide order Annexure P-11 dated 25.08.2008, the appeal has been C.W.P. No. 16476 of 2008 -3- dismissed on the ground that the house tax due till the year 2006-07 was Rs. 64,65,745/- and, therefore, the appeal could not be entertained under Section 147 of the Act as the mandatory condition of deposit of amount due had not been fulfilled. It has been held that amount in dispuste is Rs. 64,65,745/- i.e. the amount due till 2006-07. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the limited claim of the petitioner in appeal was against order Annexure P-1. Annexure P-1 is a decision in regard to the assessment of house tax for one year. In such circumstances, the petitioner could not have been directed to deposit the entire amount of house tax due till 2006-07. Learned counsel for the respondents have highlighted that the petitioner has been dilly dallying the payment and has in fact not paid since the year 1995-96. Learned counsel for the respondents has, however, not been able to show to the Court that the amount of house tax at issue before the Appellate Forum was for the period upto 2006-07. I have considered the issue. Relevant provision that requires deposit of the amount under Section 147 (b) of the act reads as under:- “Section 147: Conditions of right to appeal: No appeal shall be entertained under Section 146 unless: xx xx xx xx (b) The amount, if any, in dispute in the appeal has been deposited by the appellant in the office of the corporation.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has asserted that the amount disputed in appeal by the petitioner was only Rs. 3,75,788/- and, therefore, the authority could not have held that the amount disputed by the C.W.P. No. 16476 of 2008 -4- petitioner was more. Having considered the issue, I am of the opinion that the appellate forum can require a deposit of the disputed amount of house tax which is subject matter of the appeal only. Annexure P-1 is the order that was challenged in appeal. The house tax assessed under Annexure P-1 is only Rs. 3,75,788/- and, therefore, the respondents could not have asked for deposit of Rs. 64,65,745/-. The petitioner already having deposited Rs. 3,49,868/- i.e. the amount disputed in appeal (house tax to the tune of Rs. 25,920/- having already been deposited) the appeal is required to be entertained as per law. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Order Annexure P-11 is set aside. The appellate authority would hear the parties on the deposit already made by the petitioner and pass orders according to law. In view of the delay already caused, the appeal shall be decided within a period of 60 days of receipt of copy of this order. 11.02.2009 (AJAI LAMBA) shivani JUDGE