IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 3349 of 2008 Between: M/s.S.V.Construction Company, First Floor Central Plaza, Gooty Road, Kurnool, rep. by its Managing Partner S.Venkatramaiah. ..... PETITIONER AND Kurnool Municipal Corporation, rep. by its Commissioner, Kurnool. .....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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or Orders, direction or directions declaring the acting of the Respondent in making an assessment and demanding the tax from the petitioner in respect of the entire extent of the Premises No.46-1K-1G, Ground Floor, Central Plaza, Gooty Road, Kurnool for the period 2003 to 2007 despite the sale of the part of the said premises by the petitioner on 17.6.2005, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and to issue a consequential direction to the Respondent to act in accordance with law by recovering the property tax from the petitioner on making an assessment in respect of the property owned by it in premises No.46-1k-1G, Ground floor, Central Plaza, Gooty Road, Kurnool after extending the benefit towards vacancy of the premises and pass such other order orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: (SC FOR KURNOOL & NELLORE MC)A.SREEDHAR The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.3349 of 2008 ORDER : (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Sreedhar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Municipal Corporation. The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in making an assessment and demanding the tax from the petitioner in respect of the entire extent of the premises bearing No. 46-1K-1G, Ground floor, Central Plaza, Gooty Road, Kurnool for the period from 2003 to 2007 despite sale of part of the premises by the petitioner on 17.6.2005 in favour of M/s. Vasavi Educational Society, as illegal and arbitrary and unconstitutional. The petitioner company, which is a registered partnership firm has constructed a commercial-cum-residential complex known as Central Plaza and sold the same to several persons. However it leased out an extent of 29,000 sq.ft., in the ground floor to M/s. Gautham Academy for running an educational institution and the same was assessed to property tax by allotting door nos. i.e., 46-1K-1G and 46/1K-2G. The half yearly tax in respect of those premises was fixed at Rs. 26,010/- and 10,890/- respectively and the same was also paid upto 31.3.2003. Subsequently, in September, 2003, when the said educational institution closed down its institution, the entire ground floor owned by the petitioner became vacant and the petitioner also informed about the same to the respondent on 4.8.2003 and accordingly requested for waiver of the property tax in view of the vacancy of the premises. The respondent while acceding to the request of the petitioner, deleted the demand for the second half year, i.e. from 2003-2004 from the assessment register, and informed it that as and when it would make use of the ground floor, tax would be levied. While so, the petitioner sold away a part of the ground floor to M/s. Sri Vasavi Educational Society under registered sale deed dated 17.6.2005 and the same was also informed to the respondent. However, the respondent Municipality issued a demand notice dated 29.12.2007 to the petitioner demanding an amount of Rs. 3,69,320/- and Rs. 1,54,659/- in respect of the two premises for the period from 2003-2007. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent without taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has sold away part of the premises to M/s. Vasavi Educational Society has erroneously raised the demand. Petitioner further states that if the respondent assess the property to tax and raises the demand in respect of the property owned by it, excluding the premises sold by it to M/s. Vasavi Educational Society, it would pay the same. It, therefore, filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. In the circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter, we feel it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to make appropriate representation to the respondent bringing all these facts to its notice. On such representation being filed, the respondent shall consider and dispose of the same expeditiously, in accordance with law. Till such time, no coercive steps shall be taken by the respondent for recovery of the tax. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ___________________ T. MEENA KUMARI,J DATE: 19th February, 2008 ______________ G. ROHINI, ,J Note: Furnish c.c. in one week B/o pnb To 1. The Commissioner, Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool. 2.2CD copies // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER