MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ACHALPUR Vs. SHRIRAM SAW MILL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Municipal Council, Achalpur has filed present petition with request to treat it as Petition in representative capacity in 74 Appeals which are preferred against it by various Occupiers or Allottees of plots in its Bazaar with further direction to all Appellants to deposit entire amount demanded by notices by it as precondition to proceed with the Appeals. Prayer is also made to quash and set aside ex-parte interim stay order dated 4/6/2003 passed by learned J. M. F. C. Achalpur in Appeal No. 54/2002 and other similar Appeals. All these Appeals are filed under Section 169 read with Section 171 of Maharashtra Municipal Council, Nagar Panchayat and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter mentioned as Municipal Act). Considering the nature of controversy, I have heard parties at length at the stage of admission itself. Rule is thus made returnable forthwith.

(2.) Municipal Council is local authority constituted under the provisions of Municipal Act to look after municipal administration of Achalpur town as per notification under Sub-Article (2) of Article 243Q of Constitution of India. Respondent before this Court is a proprietary concern doing business as Saw Mill and Timber Trading. Petitioner has in its jurisdiction area commonly known as "Lakud Bazaar" (Timber Market) and a plot ad measuring " 8' X 20' " is given on lease by it to Respondent and also other 29 similarly situated commercial establishments. These plots are allotted about 15 to 20 years back. It was charging Rs. 220/-only per year as rent from each allottee and considering the price hikes and establishment expenditure, it decided to have redetermination of said rent. Accordingly it approached to Deputy Director of Town Planning, Amravati and also to Collector, Amravati for that purpose and said authorities then re-determined the rent at the date of Rs. 120/-only per sq m. (i. e. square meter). Collector not only revised the rent but also demanded 50% of the income which petitioner would be getting on account of said hike which works at Rs 6,11,229/ per year. Accordingly said office has made total demand of Rs. 22,45,960/ i. e. Twenty two Lakhs Forty five Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty only for the years 2000 to 2003. Municipal Council states that accordingly it deposited amount of Rs 5 Lakhs with Collector and issued demand notices to all occupiers including respondent to collect rent at new rate.

(3.) Aggrieved by those bills/demand notices, present respondent and others then filed Appeals under Section 169 read with Section 171 of Municipal Act before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Achalpur and appeal of present respondent has been registered as Municipal Appeal No. 54/2002. The learned Magistrate issued notice on 27/9/2002 and Petitioner immediately raised the preliminary objection about maintainability pointing out that as required by Section 170, respondent has not deposited full amount of demand notice before preferring Appeal. Respondent by his reply opposed said objection and contended that till appeal is set down for final hearing said amount need not be deposited. In the meanwhile, Petitioner issued notice dated 2/6/2003 calling upon all occupiers including present respondent to pay the arrears of rent within 24 hours or else it would be constrained to take coercive steps including that of forcible dispossession. Respondent and other occupiers then moved application in pending appeal to seek restraining orders and on 4/6/2003 Magistrate granted the same ex parte. On 18/6/2003 petitioner filed application for its vacation but said application is not decided till today and hence, making said grievance and arrears as mentioned above, Municipal Council has filed present writ petition only against one respondent but in representative capacity.