THE HONORARY SECRETARY, SOURASHTRA SABHA Vs. THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF THE SPECIAL TRIBUNAL OF THE URBAN LAND TAX APPEAL AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Honorary Secretary, Sourashtra Sabha, Madurai has filed this writ petition for the issue of a writ of a certiorari to quash the order, date 15th November, 1973, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Madurai West and confirmed by the. Presiding Officer (Subordinate Judge) of the Special Tribunal of the Urban Land Tax Appeals, Madurai. The matter arises under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Tax Act, 1966.

(2.) IT is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the Sourashtra Sabha, hereinafter referred to as the Sabha, has under its control and management a denominational temple known as Sri Prasanna Venkatesa Perumal Temple at Madurai. Several members of the Sourashtra community have created Kattalais or specific endowments for the performance of some specific religious charities connected with the said temple and the Kattalais are evidenced by registered documents. By these documents, the various settlors have nominated the Sabha to be in management of the properties endowed to the kattalais.

(3.) BY his order, dated 15th November, 1973, which order is challenged in these proceedings, the second respondent rejected the contention of the petitioner and treated the Kattalai properties as the properties of the Sabha and determined the rate of tax payable accordingly. Aggrieved by the said order of the second respondent, the Sabha preferred U.L.T.A. No. 142 of 1974 before the statutory Appellate Authority, the Special Tribunal for Urban Land Tax Appeal, Madurai. The Sabha had preferred two other appeals, U.L.T.A. Nos. 375 of 1973 and 72 of 1976. The appeals were heard together. The first respondent by a common order, dated 24th September, 1976, set aside the valuations fixed by the Assistant Commissioner, namely the second respondent, for certain irregularities apparent on the face of the order and remanded the matter for disposal on certain limited points. But the Special Tribunal, however, rejected the contention advanced on the side of the Sabha that items 13 to 32 which are Kattalai properties in the hands of the Sabha should not be clubbed together for the purpose of determining the rate of tax. Consequently, the Sabha has filed this writ petition. As already stated, the compass of this writ petition is confined only to the contention which was not upheld by the respondents, namely, items 13 to 32 included in the return, dated 28th February, 1972, which are admitted kattalai properties in the hands of the Sabha should not be clubbed together for the purpose of determining the rate of urban land tax.