Disposed

Shishupal Shankar Prabhavalkar and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC24 Jul 2014CAI/55/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This civil application, part of a PIL regarding property taxes, was disposed of as no action was required at that time. Bills had been issued to industries and individuals. The Court directed the Sarpanch to file an affidavit within three months detailing tax recovery based on those bills.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Village Panchayat Sarpanch to file an affidavit within three months regarding tax recovery.

Shishupal Shankar Prabhavalkar and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Bombay HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

cai-55.09

pmw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.55 OF 2009

¶6

¶7

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.16 OF 2007

¶8

Shishupal Shankar Prabhavalkar and Anr. … Applicants

¶9

Vs.

¶10

State of Maharashtra and Ors. ... Respondents

¶11

Mr. D.V. Sutar, for the Applicants. Mr. V.P. Malvankar, AGP 'A' Panel, for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Ramesh D. Rane, for Respondent No.4. Mr. Gajanan M. Savagave, for Respondent No.5. Mr. Tejpal S. Ingale, for Respondent No.6.

¶12

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.S. CHANDURKAR, JJ. DATE : 24^th JULY, 2014

¶13

P.C.

¶14

1] Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. We

¶15

have perused the affidavit of Shri Sardar Babaso Sutar, Sarpanch of Respondent No.5 Village Panchayat. To the said affidavit, particulars of the bills issued by the Village Panchayat to various industries in accordance with sub-section (1) of section 129 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 have been annexed. The affidavit records that the bills have been issued to the individual members of the Respondent No.6 for the period from 2004-2005 to 2009-2010. It is stated in the

¶16

1 of 3

¶17

2 cai-55.09

¶18

affidavit that if the persons to whom the bills are addressed fail to pay the outstanding amount, the Village Panchayat shall take necessary action under sub-section (2) of section 129 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958. We accept the statements made in the said affidavit.

¶19

2] The learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.6 submits that the Village Panchayat has not refunded the amount paid by the said Respondent. He invited our attention to the judgment and order dated 24th February, 2014 in Writ Petition No.6477 of 2013. He submitted that the individual members of the sixth Respondent have applied to the Village Panchayat for execution of agreements for lumpsum payment in lieu of the property taxes and no action is taken on the said applications by the Village Panchayat.

¶20

3] Perusal of the Judgment and Order dated 24th February, 2014 in Writ Petition No.6477 of 2013 shows that a liberty has been granted to the sixth Respondent to apply to the Village Panchayat for refund of the amount and Village Panchayat has been directed to dispose of the application in accordance with law. Therefore, this issue of refund to the sixth Respondent cannot be agitated in this Civil Application. The other grievance regarding the failure of the Village

¶21

2 of 3

¶22

3 cai-55.09

¶23

Panchayat to take action on the application made by the individual industries cannot be gone into in this Application. It is for the concerned industries to adopt proceedings in that behalf.

¶24

4] From the affidavit of the Sarpanch, we find that steps have been take by issuing bills to various industries and individuals. Therefore, as of today, it is not necessary to entertain this Application. This Court has already stated that prayer clauses (a) and (b) cannot be considered. Prayer clause (c) need not be considered as of today, in view of the action taken by the Village Panchayat.

¶25

5] We make it clear that the Village Panchayat will have to recover the taxes strictly in accordance with law. The Sarpanch of Village Panchayat shall file an affidavit setting out the recovery of amounts made on the basis of the bills. Such affidavit shall be filed in this Court within a period of three months from today. Subject to what is observed above, the Application is disposed of.

¶26

(A. S. CHANDURKAR, J ) (A.S.OKA, J )

¶27

3 of 3

Shishupal Shankar Prabhavalkar and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shishupal Shankar Prabhavalkar and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mallikarjun Shivkaran Shegaonkar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, Ministry of Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Shri. Yuvraj Vasantrao Desai Vs the Dy. Collector (Caste Certificate), Rajeshri Shahu Suvidha Kendra and Anr.

Shambhuraj Shivajirao Desai Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shishupal Shankar Prabhavalkar and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sonal S. Khanolkar and Anr. Vs Union of India, through Director, Dept of Personnel and Training and Ors.

Reena K.Vyas and Anr. Vs Krishnakant M. Vyas