Petitioner sought quashing of a letter refusing 50% property tax concession under a Government Reservation applicable to physically challenged persons. Court held GR not applicable to Municipal Corporations pending new specific GR.
Petition disposed off; no immediate relief granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
40 WRIT PETITION NO.7496 OF 2023
SHRIRAM SHANKAR TAWARE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY AND OTHERS
Mr.B.T.Bodkhe h/f Mr.S.B.Solanke, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr.V.M.Kagne, AGP for the Respondent/State.
Mr.A.P.Bhandari, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
( CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND
Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.)
DATE : JULY 11, 2023
PER COURT:
1. The Petitioner has put forth prayer clauses B and C as
under :-
"B. By issuing writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction in the like
nature, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the
impugned letter dated 08.04.2022 issued by the Respondent No.3 and
further be pleased to direct the Respondent No.3 to grant 50%
concession in property tax to the petitioner in view of the Government
Resolution dated 24.11.2015 and for that purpose issue necessary
orders.
C. Pending the hearing and final disposal of this writ petition, this
Hon'ble Court may be pleased to restrain the respondent No.3 from
khs/July 2023/7496
- 2 -
taking any coercive action against the Petitioner for non payment of
property tax and for that purpose issue necessary orders."
2.Since Mr.Bhandari, the learned Advocate is on the panel of
the Municipal Corporation at Aurangabad, we requested him to assist
the Court. He has taken instructions and submits that the GR dated
24.11.2015, which contains certain provisions for giving benefits to the
physically challenged persons, is not applicable to the Municipal
Corporations.
3. We have perused clause 17 under the scheme lkefqgd ;kstuk (A) and clause 9 of oS;Drhd ykHkkP;k ;kstuk (B) clause 1-f(9). It is obvious that this GR is not applicable to the Municipal Corporations. The learned Advocate for the Corporation submits that there is no such similar GR, which is made applicable to the Corporations.
3.In view of the above, this petition is disposed off. However,
we deem it appropriate to record that if in future any such GR is made
applicable to the Corporations and the Petitioner is eligible, he may
espouse his cause under the said GR.
( Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. ) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
khs/July 2023/7496
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Government Resolution dated 24.11.2015 applicable to Municipal Corporations for granting property tax concession to physically challenged persons.
Shriram Shankar Taware
The State of Maharashtra through its Principal Secretary and others
Ravindra V. Ghuge
Y. G. Khobragade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court