Challenge to a Madurai Corporation demand notice revising property tax from Rs.11,000 to Rs.24,000 without reasons or opportunity. The Corporation stated the notice was only a show cause notice; the writ petition was disposed of with liberty to file objections within two weeks and directions for a reasoned order after hearing.
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.
WP(MD)No.392 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 09.01.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
WP(MD)No.392 of 2024 and WMP(MD)No.408 of 2024
R.Sundar Srinivasan
.. Petitioner
v.
The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.
.. Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned demand notice dated 18.11.2023 passed by the respondent relating to Assessment No.115/015/901792, quash the same and forbearing the respondent from making assessments arbitrarily without following the provisions of Madurai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1971.
1/4
WP(MD)No.392 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan For Respondent : Mr.K.Vinayak Standing Counsel *****
ORDER
The demand notice issued by the Corporation calling upon the petitioner to pay the revised property tax is challenged in this writ petition.
2.Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent Corporation has revised the property tax from Rs.11,000/- to Rs.24,000/without assigning any reasons and without providing an opportunity. He further submitted that the petitioner has raised certain objections for revising the property tax, however, the same has not been considered and the impugned order has been issued without any reference to the objections raised by the petitioner.
3.Mr.K.Vinayak, learned Standing Counsel took notice on behalf of the respondent Corporation and submitted that the impugned order is only a show
2/4
WP(MD)No.392 of 2024
cause notice and that the petitioner can very well appear before the respondent and offer his explanation for the revision proposed by the Corporation.
4.Since the respondent has taken a stand that the order impugned in this writ petition is only a show cause notice, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to offer his explanation to the respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the respondent, after providing an opportunity of hearing and after considering the objections, if any, raised by the petitioner, shall pass appropriate orders, within a further period of eight weeks therefrom. Till such time, the respondent shall not take any coercive steps.
Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index : Yes / No 09.01.2024 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes gk 3/4
WP(MD)No.392 of 2024
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
gk
To
The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.
WP(MD)No.392 of 2024
09.01.2024
4/4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a property tax revision demand notice issued without reasons or hearing can be quashed when the respondent claims it is only a show cause notice.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
R.Sundar Srinivasan
The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai
B.Pugalandhi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
