Disposed

Ramesh Narayandas Karva v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Mar 2015WP/1214/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the legality of a revised rateable value for property tax assessment. The court held that the revision was completed within the time extended by the Government under Section 124(2) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act, 1965, and disposed of the matter without delving into factual disputes.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed with no order as to costs.

Ramesh Narayandas Karva Vs the State of Mah and Ors. — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

W.P.No.1214/07

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.1214 OF 2007

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶8

Court's or Judge's orders

¶9

Mr.D.P.Palodkar, advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs.M.A.Deshpande, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.V.S.Bedre, advocate for Respondent No.4.

¶10

CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA & A.I.S.CHEEMA,JJ. Date : 18.03.2015. PER COURT :

¶11

Heard.

¶12

Mr.Palodkar, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contends that the procedure laid down for assessment and revision of rateable value has not been followed. The learned counsel submits that the tax can not be charged except in accordance with the procedure laid down by law as per Article 265 of the Constitution of India. The learned counsel submits that the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Township Act, 1965 provides for a complete machinery for levy and collection of property tax. The said procedure is laid down from Section 112 to Section 127 of the said Act. The learned counsel submits that in view of Section 121, authentication of the

¶13

¶14

W.P.No.1214/07

¶15

list by the authorised Valuation Officer is necessary and the same has to be done before 31^st day of July of the official year to which the list relates. The Collector is given power to allow the publication of such notice at a latter date but not later than the 31^st day of December of the official year aforesaid. The learned counsel submits that as the procedure as contemplated is not followed, the impugned action of revision of rateable value itself is illegal and no collection of tax is permissible on the basis of said impugned revision of rateable value.

¶16

Mr.Bedre, learned counsel for the Municipal Council and Mrs.Deshpande, learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader submit that in the present matter Section 124(2) would be relevant. The Government has powers to issue directions to the Municipal Council for revision of rateable value. The revision is completed as per the time extended by the Government. The learned counsel further submits that as per time extended by the Government, the work of revision of rateable value is completed. No illegality has been committed.

¶17

We have considered the submissions canvassed by the learned counsel for respective parties. This Court while admitting the matter has not granted any interim orders. After the revision of rateable value in question, twice the revision is conducted. Normally, it is conducted once in four years. The official acts are presumed to be done properly unless the said presumption is

¶18

¶19

W.P.No.1214/07

¶20

rebutted. There can not be any dispute with the proposition that the tax has to be collected in accordance with the procedure established by law. The Act of 1965 lays down complete procedure for assessment of tax, levy and collection. The levy of tax is a legislative act, assessment – quasi judicial and recovery – executive action. The petitioner is challenging the revision in rateable value. Proviso to Section 124(2) empowers the State to issue directions to Municipal Council to revise the rateable value. Section 124(2) read as it is, it empowers the State Government at any time in the public interest to issue directions to carry out revision of rateable value of all property in the Municipal areas and such directions are binding on the Municipal Council.

¶21

It is a matter of record that the State Government had issued directions after giving hearing to the parties and issuance of public notice as well as individual notices, further steps have been taken, list is authenticated within the time extended by the Government as laid down U/s 124(2) of the said Act.

¶22

It light of the above, it would not be possible to enter into the disputed questions of the facts in the present Writ Petition. Considering above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Rule

¶23

¶24

discharged. No costs.

¶25

(A.I.S.CHEEMA,J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)

¶26

Dt..18.03.2015. asp/office/wp1214.07

Ramesh Narayandas Karva v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Narayandas Karva v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pramod Shankarrao Kanade and Ors. Vs State of Maha and Ors.

The Ahmednagar District Certified Auditors Association Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Deccan Bottling and Distilling Inds Pvt. Ltd. Thr General Manager Vs State of Mah and Anr.

Ashraf Khan Taslimkhan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ujwala Giridhar Bandewad Vs the Commissioner State Election Commison Mumbai and Ors.

Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Aurangabad Vs M/S Shri. Dnyaneshwar Trust