D N DHOLAKIA DR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions are directed against the assessment made by the Rajkot Municipality for the year 1972-73. Special Civil Application No. 285 of 1973 has been filed by eleven petitioners who are tax payers of Rajkot Municipality. Special Civil Application No. 287 of 1973 has been filed by four petitioners. The petitioners Nos. 2 3 and 4 therein are the tax-payers of Rajkot Municipality. The petitioner No. 1 is Rajkot Tax Payers Association. The facts of both the cases are the same and therefore same questions arise in both of them for our determination. We therefore proceed to decide them by a common judgment.

(2.) Rajkot Municipality is constituted and functioning under the Gujarat Municipalities Act 1963 Sec. 99 of the Act empowers the Municipality to impose a tax on buildings of lands situate within the municipal borough. Rajkot Municipality has framed Rules for the purpose. They came into force on 1st January 1965. The aforesaid tax is to be based on annual letting value or percentage of capital value of the buildings or lands or both. Assessment of annual letting value is required to be made and assessment lists are required to be prepared. The rules made by Rajkot Municipality provide for making assessment and preparation of assessment list.

(3.) In 1969 the State Government addressed a communication to all municipalities in the State of Gujarat requiring them to have the assessment made by Government Officers more particularly the revised assessment to be made at the end of every four years as required by sec. 111 of the said Act. During 1972-1973 Rajkot Municipality was required to revise the assessment and prepare a fresh assessment list as required by sec. 111. The Government desired that the revision of assessment should take place at the hands of the Government officers and not at the hands of the officers appointed by the municipality. The Government desired the municipality to have the assessment done by Government officers in pursuance of the policy laid down by it in the communication addressed by it to all municipalities in 1969. The communication issued to Rajkot Municipality in 1972 led to correspondence between the municipality and the Government. The correspondence discloses that the municipality contended that there was no provision under which assessment could be done by Government Officers. In its opinion therefore if the assessment was done by Government Officers it would be unauthorised and illegal. The Government however persisted in its attempt to have the assessment done by Government Officers. It therefore informed the municipality that if it wanted grant from the Government towards dearness allowance payable to its employees it must have assessment done by Government Officers. On 29th January 1972 the municipality resolved to get the assessment work done by Government officers but pointed out that such an assessment would be illegal in light of the provisions of sec. 105. Correspondence between the municipality and the Government continued thereafter. The municipality did not carry out the assessment work. Therefore on 1st August 1972 the Government appointed 14 officers in exercise of its power under sec. 112(1) for completing the assessment list. On 19th December 1972 the Government appointed ten Appellate Officers to decide appeals against the assessment made by the Assessment Officers. It is clear from the facts of the case that the assessment for the year 1972-73 which was a revised assessment at the end of four years as contemplated by sec. 111 was made by Assessment Officers appointed by the Government. After the assessment was done notices were issued amongst others to the petitioners except the petitioner No. 1 in Special Civil Application No. 287 of 1973.