(1.) These are 130 writ petitions filed by the New Delhi Municipal Committee (the Committee). All these writ petitions raise a common question of law about the interpretation of s. 67 of the Punjab Municipal Act 1911 (the Act). I shall take the facts of C.W. No. 860 of 1969 as fairly representative of these writ petitions.
(2.) The first floor and barsati of property No. 162 Golf Links, New Delhi bearing No. IV-P/Q-178 was assessed to house-tax at an annual value of Rs. 4716.00 less ten per cent for repairs for the year 1966-67 and for the years immediately preceding thereto on the basis of actual rent paid by the tenant in occupation of the said premises. Sometime at the end of 1967 it came to light that there had been a change in the tenancy with respect to the first floor and the barsati of the said building and the same had been let out at an increased annual rent of Rs. 7800.00 with effect from 1st May, 1963. Consequently, the Committee passed a resolution dated January 27, 1968, making a proposal to amend the house-tax assessment list for the year 1965-66. In pursuance of the said resolution the Committee issued a notice to the owner respondent dated February 13, 1968, under s. 67 of the Act. The notice said : "Your building No. 162 Golf Links situated at New Delhi had been underassessed through mistake on the part of the Committee" and that the annual value of Rs. 4716.00 "ought to be revised by amending the list under s. 67 of the Punjab Municipal Act." It was further said that the proposed annual value of Rs. 780U.00 less ten per cent for repairs being the actual rent will be the "basis of the revised tax" with effect from April 1, 1965 to March 31, 1966. The Committee invited objections to the proposal and fixed 19th May, 1968 for hearing the owner. The owner filed objections. His principal objection was that the Committee was not competent to amend the list with retrospective effect. The Committee rejected the objections and affirmed the annual value of Rs. 7800.00 less ten per cent on the basis of actual rent and passed the resolution dated March 19, 1968, saying "that the assessment be confirmed as proposed and the assessment list be amended accordingly."
(3.) On May 3, 1968, the Committee informed the owner that the assessment of house-tax on his building had been finally settled and confirmed at an annual value of Rs. 7800. Aggrieved by the resolution dated March 19, 1968, the owner appealed to the Additional District Magistrate, a tribunal constituted under s. 84 of the Act. The tribunal allowed the appeal on 6th March, 1969. It held that the Committee can invoke the provisions of s. 67 for the current assessment year but not for the previous years. The tribunal said: