CWP No. 12652 of 1991 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 12652 of 1991 Date of Decision: 21.3.2011 *** THA Industries & Anr .. Petitioners Vs. The Municipal Committee, Samana. .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. Ram Lal Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. By way of present writ petition, the petitioners have laid challenge to order Annexure P-3 passed by the respondent vide which assessment of their property has been made, inter alia, on the ground that the Municipal Committee has not adopted the proper procedure prior to make the assessment; no property opportunity was given prior to passing the impugned order. The impugned order reads as under:- “Today on 27.3.1990, Shri Tarsem Chand, Proprietor Firm THA objected in person that my property has already been assessed and I am depositing tax of Rs.1215/- and assessment be reduced and corrected. The case was presented and perused. The objection was heard. Assessment has been reduced from Rs.18700/- to Rs.13,000/-. After giving a discount of 10% depreciation, it comes to Rs.11700/- and @ 15% house tax amounting to Rs.1755 has been levied. After deducting Rs.1215/- the deposit vide DCR Sr. No. 835, the bill for Rs.540/- be issued.” CWP No. 12652 of 1991 2 The tenor of the aforesaid impugned order reveals that a due opportunity of hearing was given to the objector while making the assessment. The assessment of house tax is a summary process and there is no requirement of passing a speaking order in the cases which are to be decided in a summary manner. The impugned order reveals due application of mind by the concerned authority wherein considering the objections the amount of the house tax was reduced, after giving discount towards depreciation. Not only this, some other writ petitions bearing CWP No. 4753, 4754, 4755 and 4756 of 1991, involving identical question of law, were filed by other parties, the reliance of which was placed by the petitioner of the instant case, have already been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 30.6.2010. Therefore, no interference is warranted. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE March 21, 2011 Jiten