Allowed

The General Manager, v. the Commissioner

Madras HC17 Sept 2019WP/12959/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order allowed five writ petitions challenging property tax demands against Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. in Erode District. The court set aside the demands pending a property-wise verification to determine if ownership vesting adheres to Central Government ownership and thus attracts the exemption under Article 285 of the Constitution.

What did the court decide?

The impugned property tax demands are set aside and to be re-done after a property-wise exercise to verify ownership status under Article 285 of the Constitution.

The General Manager, Vs the Commissioner — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

W.P. Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012

¶2

lIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17.09.2019

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶6

W.P. Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012 & M.P.Nos.1,1,1,1 and 1 of 2011

¶7

The General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Gandhiji Road, Erode – 638 001.

¶8

...Petitioner in the above W.Ps Vs The Commissioner, Gopichetipalayam Municipality, Gobichettypalayam, Erode District. ... Respondent in W.P.No.12959 of 2012 The Executive Officer, Periya Kodiveri Town Panchayat Periya Kodiveri Erode District. ... Respondent in W.P.No.12960 of 2012 The Executive Officer, Nambiyur Town Panchayat Nambiyur, Erode District. ... Respondent in W.P.No.12961 of 2012 The Commissioner, Sathyamangalam Municipality, Sathyamangalam, Erode District. ... Respondent in W.P.No.12962 of 2012 The Executive Officer, Kunnathur Town Panchayat Kunnathur, Erode District. ... Respondent in W.P.No.12963 of 2012

¶9

1/6

¶10

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶11

W.P. Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012

¶12

W.P.No.12959 of 2012: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the respondent's proceedings vide dated 26.08.2011 and quash the same.

¶13

W.P.No.12960 of 2012: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the respondent's proceedings vide dated 24.02.2012 and quash the same.

¶14

W.P.No.12961 of 2012: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the respondent's proceedings vide dated 08.03.2012 and quash the same.

¶15

W.P.No.12962 of 2012: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the respondent's proceedings vide assessment number 13087 and quash the same.

¶16

W.P.No.12963 of 2012: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the respondent's proceedings vide dated 01.03.2012 and quash the same.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Anbarasan

¶18

For Respondents :

¶19

W.P.No.12959 and 12962 of 2012 : Mr.B.Anand, G.A.

¶20

W.P.Nos.12960, 12961 and 12963 of 2012: Mr.R.P.Prathap Singh, G.A.

¶21

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL), challenges the

¶23

assessment and demand of property tax in respect of properties owned by it in

¶24

2/6

¶25

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶26

W.P. Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012

¶27

the light of Article 285 of the Constitution of India exempting any property owned by the Central Government from the levy of property tax.

¶28

Orders of the Division Bench of this Court dated 01.03.2018 in W.A.(MD)Nos.328 to 335 of 2018 and 21.02.2019 in Review Application (MD) Nos.77 to 84 of 2018 are referred to.

¶29

The factual position is that some properties of the Government of India stood vested in the BSNL, while certain other properties under use by BSNL continue to remain vested with the Central Government. There is no clarity forthcoming from the respective counsel as to when such vesting/transfer of ownership was occasioned. Thus the demand of property tax would have to be seen qua each specific building to determine whether the bar under Article 285 of the Constitution of India would stand attracted. This exercise has to be done property wise. The impugned demands of property tax are thus set aside and will be re-done after a proper exercise as indicated aforesaid is done, qua each specific property.

¶30

These Writ Petitions are allowed in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

¶31

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition are closed.

¶32

17.09.2019

¶33

Index : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non speaking Order sl

¶34

3/6

¶35

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶36

W.P. Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012

¶37

Dr.ANITA SUMANTH, J.

¶38

¶39

To The Commissioner, Gopichetipalayam Municipality, Gobichettypalayam, Erode District. The Executive Officer, Periya Kodiveri Town Panchayat Periya Kodiveri Erode District. The Executive Officer, Nambiyur Town Panchayat Nambiyur, Erode District. The Commissioner, Sathyamangalam Municipality, Sathyamangalam, Erode District. The Executive Officer, Kunnathur Town Panchayat Kunnathur, Erode District. W.P. Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012 & M.P.Nos.1,1,1,1 and 1 of 2011

¶40

17.09.2019

¶41

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶42

4/6

¶43

W.P. Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012

¶44

W.P.Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012

¶45

and M.P.Nos.1,1,1,1 and 1 of 2012

¶46

Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.

¶47

These Writ Petitions are posted under the caption 'for clarification'.

¶48

Mr.B.Anand, learned Government Advocate for respondents in W.P.Nos.12959 and 12962 of 2012 and Mr.R.P.Prathap Singh, learned Government Advocate for respondents in W.P.Nos.12960, 12961 and 12963 of 2012 submit that the demands though raised for various periods, commencing from 2008 onwards are restricted to the period post 19.04.2011 only.

¶49

The order of the Division Bench in W.A.(MD) Nos.328 to 335 of 2018 dated 01.03.2018 as well as Review Application (MD) Nos.77 to 84 of 2018 dated 21.02.2019 pertains to properties situated in Nagercoil, whereas, the properties in the instant Writ Petitions fall in Erode District.

¶50

Thus the order passed in these Writ Petitions on 17.09.2019 to the effect that the assessment would have to be made after verifying the status and ownership of each property is reiterated.

¶51

Sl 24.09.2019

¶52

5/6

¶53

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶54

W.P. Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012

¶55

Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.

¶56

¶57

W.P.Nos.12959 to 12963 of 2012
and M.P.Nos.1,1,1,1 and 1 of 2012

¶58

24.09.2019

¶59

6/6

¶60

http://www.judis.nic.in

The General Manager, v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The General Manager, v. the Commissioner

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

P.T.Rajan Vs the Income Tax Settlement

M/S.Manali Petrochemical Ltd., Vs the Addl. Director General of

K.M.Jayaraman, Vs the Commissioner

M/s.Omne Agate Systems Pvt. Ltd., Vs the Commissioner of Income Tax

M/s. Kwality Steels Vs The Assistant Commissioner

M/S.Oasys Cybernetics Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Commissioner of Income Tax