IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.6327 of 2007 Between: N.Santamma. ..... PETITIONER AND The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, rep. by its Commissioner, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS The Hon’ble Sri Justice Bilal Nazki and The Hon’ble Sri Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao Writ Petition No.6327 of 2006 Order: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Bilal Nazki) The petitioner has challenged the demand notice issued by the second respondent-Deputy Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation on 20th March, 2006 demanding an amount of Rs.20,242/- towards arrears of property tax. Several opportunities were given to the respondents to file counter, but, they have not filed counter. The main grievance of the petitioner is that she is owner of a very small and old house, which she has purchased for a consideration of Rs.7,000/- under a registered sale deed. The same house is being assessed as four houses bearing proposed House Nos.5-2-743 to 5- 2-746. We have seen the impugned demand notices, which have been annexed to the Writ Petition. The latest demand notice dated 20-03-2006 pertains to House No.5-2-745 and 5-2-746 whereas the demand notice dated 16-02-2006 is with respect to House Nos.5-2-743 and 5-2-744. Similar is the notice dated 25-11-2005. There is a copy of receipt dated 31-03-2002 showing the deposit of tax with respect to House Nos.5-2- 743 and 5-2-744. The petitioner has purchased the house on the basis of a sale deed, which refers to House Nos.5-2-743 to 5-2-746. Since the respondents have not filed any counter- affidavit, we are not in a position to appreciate the controversy between the parties. However, it appears prima facie that the same house is being taxed by giving it four different house numbers. Therefore, we allow the petitioner to make a representation to the first respondent-Commissioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The interim stay granted by this Court on 03-04- 2006 shall remain operative till the representation is decided by the Commissioner, provided, such representation is made by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. __________________________ (Bilal Nazki, J) 24th April, 2007 ____________________________ (Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J) lur