5&37 Public School, Through Principal, Krishna Public School, Nehru Nagar East, Bhilai Nagar, District Durg [Chhattisgarh] ^w <..-/^7'' ./y)<y^ /^ /.r«y-Z!^ ^/Wxy /^•'....(iv' y ).'-. Munidpal Corporation thru' Commissioner, Municipal ..-••K ^•>< ...••rr) ^\ycY ^' Corporation, Bhilai ,District Durg [Chhattisgarh] /2? Property Tax Officer, Munidpal Corporation,Bhilai, Distt. Durg [Chhattisgarh] ^. District Judge, Durg, District, Durg [Chhattisgarh] [ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ^NDIA^F&R^SSUANCE ^F_WRTr IN ii MANDAMUS PROHIBITION AND OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS, DIRECTXON OR DIRECTIONS. ORDER OR ORDERSl ^>uu_sLd3inits as ^BSB^^??^^^^?^? ^S^ts, ^WRRI, ^NTTS, fa<?(iyy,< ..^.3?...^o.^^^ ^sierqaiK^ Shri Saajay K. Agrawal, cou4sel for fhe petitloner. <> Sliri R.S. Jaiswal, counsel fot' fhe respondents. Heari both the counsel. By this writ petition Uie p^ dated 4.12.2004 passed by tb.e D District Judge during the pendenc^ stav. |iii question is exeinpted froni pro Section 136 (c) of the Chhattisgarlt. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 j(for shon 'the Acf), aad even fhen |tax aad even 33% tax has alreadv jtlie stay appUcation by the District. ^titioner has chaBenged the order ^strict Jud.ge, wbereby tbe leai-u.ed |r of the appeal refused to graat fhe Leai-aed cauiisel for the petiltioner subinitted tliat the buildiiig pei-K' tax as per the provisions of fhe respondents have imposed the beea re.alised, tfaerefore, rejectmg IJudge is iUeeal, On the other haud, lean^Sed counsel for tlie i^spon.dents E |subm.itted fhat the properiy is liablfe to tax. Having heard fhe learned cibuusel for the pardes aud haviag i iregard to Section 136 (c) of tbe Apt, which envisages thai bmldiags |and laads or poilions thei^of psed exclusively for ediicational 1 purposes iricludiug sctj.ools, boar(p.ing houses, hostels aad Ubraries lare not liable to tax. Therefore, ia view of the abofe provisions i.e. Section 136 (c) of ttie Act and facts and circuiasta&c ss of the case, ffae itapugned order passe.d by fhe District Judge is nc|t iii accoz-daiice witli law, sanie is luable to be set aside aa.d it is set a^ide. Gi.PR.I—FS/350—12/2000—50, £^?:S;e°;7'-SV:L:? ?i'??'?Stf1^ ;tER ^^ '^PVv^, yalyic, fsj<yiiyli,< ..^.^..S:j3.S^/... 4- -S-{~ 1 qiplfa^i ^WvS tf fetA ^N^TC ^ Both tlie couiisel have a^reed that this petition inay be idisposed of with a dtrecuon to th| |appeal itself. As agreed to by leamed coiiij pppeai is fixed for heaiing on 17^ ^irdered that the respondents shoi^id aot take any coercive steps fbr irealizatton of fhe reinamiag amoujat of assessed tax aad also shall |not en-cash ffae cheques given by qie petitioner mi passiag of 15 days after decision of ffae appeal by fhe is directed to dispose of fhe appeal With the aforesaid direction.1 01. In view of fhis order, yoiiiia. ^0.9896/2004 also staad disposec Certiiied copy as per Rules. District.Judge to dispose of th( Isel for both the parties and as the th JaiiUi3T'.r, 2004, therefore, it is District Judge. The District Judge at Uie earliest. the writ petition stands disposed Vl.(W.)P.No.5254/2004 and I.A. 01. S3F L.C.