IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 14826 of 2008 Between: Muluktla Atchuta Ramayya Govt., Educational Trust Rep. by its Executive Officer., Kakinada ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Govt. of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary Municipal Administration Department Hyderabad 2 Kakinada Municipal Corporation Rep. by its Commissioner, Kakinada .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 direction the impugned action of the Respondents, particularly the 2nd Respondent in not disposing the Revision Petitions pending with it in respect of various demand notices issued periodically even though the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of property tax exemption under section 88910 @ of the A.P. Municipalities Act and not accepting representations from the petitioners without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice etc and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to dispose of the Revision petitions lying pending and also to accept and consider our Representations and pass appropriate orders of the grant of exemption under section 88 (1) @ of the A.P. Municipalities Act after personally hearing the petitioner pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.N.V.ANANTHA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.NO. 14826 OF 2008 ORDER: (Per Smt. T. Meena Kumari, J) The writ petition has been filed questioning the action of the respondents in not disposing of the revision petitions in respect of various demand notices issued periodically, even though the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of property tax exemption under section 88 (1) (c) of the A.P. Municipalities Act and consequently sought a direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of the revision petitions. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is an educational trust being a charitable trust under the control of Endowments Department and it is exempted from payment of property tax as per section 88 (1) (c) of the A.P. Municipalities Act and as such the 2nd respondent is not entitled to issue the impugned proceedings. Several revision petitions were filed challenging the demand notices issued from time to time and they were pending. In this writ petition the demand notice dated 19.12.2007 is challenged. On the earlier occasion, the petitioner trust approached this Court and filed a writ petition being WP No. 5032 of 2004 challenging the notice dated 1.8.2003 for payment of property tax for the period commencing from 1997-98 to 2003-04. This Court had dismissed the writ petition on the ground that no material was placed before this Court that the petitioner trust was entitled to benefit of exemption under Section 88 (1) (c) of the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965. On the same grounds, the present writ petition is also filed. There is no material placed before this Court to substantiate the contention that the petitioner’s educational institution is a charitable trust imparting services of charity. In the absence of such material, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ___________________ T. MEENA KUMARI, J _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Dt.10.7.2008 KR ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VR}