IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 22891 of 1996, 19065 of 1997, 7704 of 2001, 4857 and 5415 of 2002 WRIT PETITION NO : 22891 of 1996 Between: The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanama Rep. by its Executive Officer. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary to the Govt. of A.P. Municipality Department, Secretariat, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner, Municipality Khammam, Khammam District. 3 The Appellate Commissioner, Khammam Municipality. .....RESPONDENTS 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 rule nisi calling for the records leading upto and including of the impugned proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent in revision petition No. A1-1-R5-R6, dated 27.02.1996, to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction more especially in the nature of writ of certiorari order of quashing the impugned proceedings in revision petition No. A1-1-R5-R6, dt. 27-2-1996 to the extent it went against the petitioner herein issued by the 2nd respondent herein. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.ADINARAYANA RAJU Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. WRIT PETITION NO : 19065 of 1997 Between: The Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Appellate Commissioner, Tirupathi Municipality, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3 The Commissioner, Tirupathi Municipality,Tirupathi, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 an appropriate Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to dispose of the representation dt: 5-9-1995 of the petitioner Devasthanam by exempting the property tax in regard to its properties U/s. 88 of the A.P.Municipalities Act. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.ADINARAYANA RAJU Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. WRIT PETITION NO : 7704 of 2001 Between: The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, Rep. by its Executive Officer. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary to the Govt. of A.P. Municipal Administration, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner, Tadipathri Municipality, Thadipathri Municipalities, Thadipathri, Ananthapur District. 3 The Judicial II Class Magistrate Court, Thadipathri. .....RESPONDENTS 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 any appropriate Writ, Order or a direction especially Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned notice ROC.No. 3820/99/A 1, dt. 13-2-2001 issued by the 2nd Respondent herein, is wholly illegal, quite contrary to the earlier proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent in ROC.No.6398/97-A1, dt. 30-9-2000 and pending disposal of the Revision Petition, dt 6-10-93 by issuing rule nisi calling for the relevant records. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.ADINARAYANA RAJU Counsel for Respondent Nos 1 to 3: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. WRIT PETITION NO : 4857 of 2002 Between: Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, rep by Executive Officer Tirupathi, Chittoor Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Kurnool, Kurnool Dist. 2 The Appellant Commissioner, Kurnool Municipal Corporation Kurnool Dist. .....RESPONDENTS 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 any appropriate Writ, order or direction more especially Writ of mandamus, declaring the impugned Proceedings 38383, dated 4-12-2001 issued by the 1st respondent herein as illegal, ultravires, quite contrary to section 202(1) (b) of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.ADINARAYANA RAJU Counsel for Respondents 1 and 2:MR.A.SREEDHAR WRIT PETITION NO : 5415 of 2002 Between: Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams Executive Officer Tirupathi, Chittoor Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner Municipal Corporation Guntur, Guntur Dist. 2 The Appellat Commissioner Guntur Municipal Corporation, Guntur Dist. .....RESPONDENTS 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 any appropriate Writ, order or direction more especially Writ of mandamus, declaring the impugned Proceedings 152A/01 A, dated 20-10-2001 issued by the 1st respondent herein as illegal, ultravires, quite contrary to section 202(1) (b) of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.ADINARAYANA RAJU Counsel for Respondent Nos 1 and 2: MR.T.S.VENKATA RAMANA The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER: (Per BPR, J) Since common question is involved in all these writ petitions, they are being taken up together for disposal. The petitioner, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, filed all these writ petitions assailing the impugned proceedings, whereunder the claim of the petitioner for exemption of the property tax in respect of Kalyanamandapams constructed by it was rejected. The averments of the petitioner are that the service charges being collected by Devasthanams are exempted from income tax as there is no income or profit from the Kalyanamandapam, which was constructed for the public purpose and that the petitioner had already obtained exemption in respect of such Kalyanamandapams, which come under the purview of Gram Panchayaths in the State, under the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act vide G.O.Ms.No.1738, dated 20.11.2001 and the same should be extended to these cases also. In support, the petitioner relied on Section 88 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965. Hence, the writ petition. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and also on perusal of the material on record, we are of the view that as long as there is no such order of exemption of property tax granted by the competent authority and G.O.Ms.No. 1738, dated 20.11.2001 was only with regard to the Kalyanamandapams situated in Grampanchayaths, the petitioner cannot claim any benefit vide the said G.O and any exemption granted under the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act also cannot be extended. However, it is left open to the petitioner to approach the Government seeking for exemption of the property tax subject to condition that the petitioner pays the tax till any such orders are passed. The Writ Petitions are accordingly dismissed. It is needless to mention that if the petitioner approaches the Government by way of an application, after making payment of the tax, the Government should consider and dispose of the application, if any filed by the petitioner, on merits, in accordance with law. No costs. _________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J __________________ C.Y.SOMAYAJULU, J Dated: 29.04.2008. sj .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Secretary to the Govt. of A.P. Municipality Department, Secretariat, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner, Municipality Khammam, Khammam District. 3. The Appellate Commissioner, Khammam Municipality. 4. 2 CCs to the Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development, High Court buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 5. 2CD copies. Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}