Allowed

The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. the Secretary to Government

Madras HC27 Jun 2019WP/1669/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed a writ petition filed by BSNL challenging a property tax demand for 2000-2011. The court set aside the tax demand and the impugned order due to a prior Division Bench ruling that exempted the property as vested from 19.04.2011. The order is subject to any pending appeal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed; the demand of property tax for the period prior to 19.04.2011 was set aside; and the impugned order dated 14.12.2010 was set aside.

The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs the Secretary to Government — Property and Title | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 27.06.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶5

W.P.No.1669 of 2011 and

¶6

WMP.Nos.1 & 2 of 2011

¶7

The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Coimbatore, (SSA) Rep. by its Asst.General Manager, Land and Building, Office of the Principle General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, No.2, Bharathi Park, Second Street, Coimbatore-43. ...Petitioner

¶8

Vs 1. The Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Secretariat, Chennai.

¶9

The Commissioner, Mettupalayam Municipality, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore. ...Respondents

¶10

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, or order or direction, calling for the records of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.3649/2009/A3 dated 14.12.2010 and quash the same and further direct the respondent to restore the water supply to the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Main Exchange Building, Mettupalayam and Microwave Building, Mettupalayam including the Staff Quarters,came to be vested with effect from 19.04.2011.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.K.R.Ramesh Kumar

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.A.Zakkir Hussain, Govt. Advocate for R1

¶13

Mr.A.S,.Thambuswamy for R2

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

The demand of property tax for the assessment years 2000 - 2001 to 2010 - 2011, is under challenge in the present writ petition.

¶17

It is brought to the notice of this Court that, by an order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 21.12.2018, passed in Writ Appeal (MD) Nos.328 to 335 of 2018, as well as in the Review Application (MD) Nos.77 to 84 of 2018, the properties of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, came to be vested with effect from 19.04.2011 and as such the demand of property tax prior to 19.04.2011 cannot be sustained, since the same is exempted.

¶18

In view of the same, the present demand of property tax for the period prior to 19.04.2011, requires to be set aside. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed and the impugned order dated 14.12.2010, is set aside. However, this order shall be subject to any order passed in Appeal as against the earlier order of the Division Bench dated 21.12.2018.

¶19

Writ petition stands allowed. No Costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-II)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Pkn.
To
1. The Secretary to Government,
Municipal Administration and
Water Supply Department,
Secretariat, Chennai.

¶20

The Commissioner, Mettupalayam Municipality, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore. +1 cc to M/s.K.R.Ramesh Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.53350 +1 cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.54960

¶21

W.P.No.1669 of 2011 SJ(CO) SSM(19/07/2019)SSM(07/08/2019)

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Umapathi Vs the District Manager

M/S.Parsn Commercial Complex Vs the Managing Director

Rural Uplift Centre Vs Government of Tamilnadu

Tvl.Sabari Quality Foods, Rep Vs the Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

P. Arumugm Vs Th Deputy Commissiner

S.Shankar, Managing Partner Vs the Secretary, Department of