B SUBBULAKSHMI Vs. COMMISSIONER AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent of both sides, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.

(2.) Heard Mr.S.Sathyaraj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.K.Bhuvaneswari, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents/Corporation of Salem.

(3.) What is challenged in this writ petition is the property tax notice issued by the second respondent in the impugned proceedings dated 22.11.2013 calling upon the petitioner to pay Rs.24,024/-, otherwise under Section 204(d) of the Salem City Municipal Corporation Act, 1994, (for short 'the Act') water connection to the house of the petitioner would be disconnected, with a prayer to quash the said notice and to issue a consequential direction to the respondent restraining them from taking coercive steps against the petitioner and also for rectification of the problem in the water service connection assessment No.1014186 and to provide water supply to the petitioner premises.