MOHAMMAD FAROOQUE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner has prayed, inter alia :-

(2.) It is stated in details that the petitioner is the owner of the building situated at premises No. T-44A, Rabindra Sarani, Calcutta, formerly known as 44, Rabindra Sarani and the said building is used as guest house and the audit report also speaks of the nature of the premises. It is contended that the petitioner realise Rs. 45.00 for single bed and Rs. 90.00 for double bed per day from the guests of the said guest house. Gross annual receipt from the said guest house is Rupees 4,13,144/-. According to the petitioner the annual valuation of the said premises should be 71/2% of the said amount under S. 174(4) of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act. It is stated that the petitioner has 53 rooms in the said guest house and each room is provided with a bed for sleeping accommodation and the rooms are furnished. It is placed on record that the petitioner received a notice dt. 24-5-86, issued by the Assessor, Calcutta Municipal Corporation wherein the petitioner was informed that pursuant to the petitioner's objection to the assessment of the above premises the Assessor, Calcutta Municipal Corporation by notice under S. 182 of the West Bengal Act, XXXII of 1951 vide proviso to Section 179(1) of the West Bengal Act, LIX of 1980 requested the petitioner to appear before the Hearing Officer on 5-6-86 with evidence, oral and documentary. Upon assessment in July, 1987 the Corporation issued a rate bill which shows annual valuation at Rs. 4,12,365.00 and the gross amount of tax or rate less the rebate has been shown as Rupees 41,236.50. Being aggrieved the petitioner has come to this Court on the ground that the said provisions have been rendered completely nugatory and/or made infructuous the statutory right of appeal which has been granted to the petitioner under Sec. 189 of the Act. It is contended that it would be impossible to legislate that the appeal shall abate unless the consolidated rate is continued to be deposited until the appeal is finally disposed of and such provision is unconstitutional and void being beyond the scope of the legislative authority of the State.

(3.) The writ petition is opposed by the respondents. It is disclosed, inter alia, that the petitioner has alternative remedy of preferring appeal against the assessment of annual valuation of the building and to assess tax.