IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.2689 of 2008 Between: C.Mounika, W/o.C. Rajender Kumar, R/o. D.No.2-8-36, Upstairs, Market Road, Mahaboobnagar. ...Petitioner And The Commissioner, Mahabubnagar Municipality, Mahabubnagar. ...Respondent Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, one particularly in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in issuing demand notices dated 25.12.2007/1.1.2008 with Notice No.10390000092927 demanding the petitioner to pay the property tax including arrears for a sum of Rs.1,92,452/- for the premises with door Nos.2-8-36 to 2-8-40, Demand Notice No.10390000092928 demanding a sum of Rs.3,634/- for the premises No.2-8-41 and Demand Notice No.10390000092929 demanding a sum of Rs.40,215/- for the premises bearing Nos.2-8-42 and 43 pending disposal of Revision Petitions dated 23.7.2002, 29.8.2007 and 26.10.2007 is arbitrary, illegal and violative of the provisions of the A.P. Municipalities Act and to direct the respondent not to collect the property tax as per the Demand Notices dated 25.12.2007/1.1.2008 with Notice No.10390000092927 demanding the petitioner to pay the property tax including arrears for a sum of Rs.1,92,452/- for the premises with door Nos.2-8-36 to 2-8-40, Demand Notice No.10390000092928 demanding a sum of Rs.3,634/- for the premises No.2-8-41 and Demand Notice No.10390000092929 demanding a sum of Rs.40,215/- for the premises bearing Nos.2-8-42 and 43. Counsel for the petitioner : Sri K. Someswara Kumar Counsel for the respondent : Sri Polisetty Radhakrishna Standing Counsel for Municipalities (TA). The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, C.J.) Rule. Service of rule is waived by Sri P. Radhakrishna, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities appearing for the respondent. At the request of the learned Advocates, the petition is finally heard today. The petitioner has been aggrieved by the demand notices issued by the respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that municipal tax levied upon her property had been increased exorbitantly and, therefore, the increase has been challenged by her. The petitioner’s Revision Petition No.9568 of 2007 is still pending before the respondent and even during the pendency of the petition, coercive action is sought to be taken for recovering the amount demanded from the petitioner. It has been submitted by the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner that in pursuance of the interim order dated 12th February, 2008 passed by this Court, the petitioner has already deposited 50% of the amount of tax demanded by the respondent. Looking to the peculiar facts of the case and in view of the fact that Revision Petition No.9568 of 2007 filed before the respondent has not yet been decided, we direct the respondent to dispose of the said revision petition within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The learned Advocate for the petitioner has assured this Court that the petitioner’s representative appearing before the respondent in the afore-stated revision petition shall extend his cooperation to the respondent so that the revision petition can be decided within the period prescribed by this Court. Looking to the peculiar facts of the case and in view of an interim order passed by this Court earlier, it is directed that till the revision petition is finally decided, no further amount of tax, which is subject matter of revision petition shall be recovered by the respondent by using coercive methods. In view of the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of as allowed to the above extent with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, C.J. 1st June, 2009 RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. To 1. The Commissioner, Mahabubnagar Municipality, Mahabubnagar. 2. Two C.D. copies. ARS