LAWS(UTN)-2004-7-40

BANSHI LAL SHAH Vs. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ALMORA

Decided On July 28, 2004
Banshi Lal Shah Appellant
V/S
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Almora Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the present writ petition the petitioners have prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order of Executive Officer (Prabhari Adhikari) of the Municipality, Almora dated 26 -11 -1987 and that of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Almora dated 22 -09 -1988 (Annexure -I & II to the writ petition).

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case according to the petitioners are that they are the owner of a building no. 284 at Thana Bazar, Almora, which is a triple storied building and the petitioners are in occupation of the 2nd floor and the ground floor. A smali shop of the petitioners has been let out to a tenant on a rent @ Rs. 80/ - per month and the 1st floor is rented out to another tenant @ Rs. 100/ - per month. There is no other tenant in whole of the building in question.

(3.) THE Municipal Board, Almora sent a notice dated 25 -12 -1986 to the petitioners on 01 -01 -1987 and informed the petitioners that the annual assessment of the building in question, namely, building no. 284, had been increased from Rs. 8592/ - to Rs. 14,280/ -. The Municipal Board also invited objections against the proposed increase of annual assessment of the building in question within a period of one month. The petitioners filed objections on 02 -01 -87 before the Municipal Board, Almora as against the proposed Annual Assessment contained in the notice dated 25 -12 -86. The petitioners in para 2 of the objections stated that the building was constructed in the year 1975 -76 and since then no new constructions or material additions have been made in the building. In paragraph 4 of the objections, the petitioners submitted that the rooms which were previously let out to some tenants, were not being occupied by the tenants and no alterations have been made in the building; and that the tenants were only in the second storey of the building and therefore, there was no question of increasing the assessment of the building. Para 2 and 4 of the objections dated 02 -01 -1987 are reproduced below: HIDNI TYPING