PARSHOTAM LAL GUPTA Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Articles 226/227'of the Constitution for quashing the order dated 27. 6. 1983 passed by the Municipal Committee Ferozpur City and the appellate order dated 15. 9. 1983 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepur, and for the, refund of Rs. 593/recovered from the petitioner as house tax.

(2.) PETITIONER No. l is a partner of the firm M/s. Rameshwar Dass Madan Lal, Main Bazar, Ferozepur City. The partnership-firm has been arrayed in the present petition as petitioner No. 2. The petitioners own a shop (No. CS-1/97) in the Main Bazar of the City. Annual rental value of the shop was fixed for the year 1973-74 by the Municipal Committee, Ferozepur City at Rs. 90/per month and Rs. 1080.00 per annum. The Municipal Committee sent a notice to the petitioners in the month of February, 1982, proposing the annual rental value of the shop to be fixed at Rs. 3780.00 for the year 1982-83 (taking the monthly rent at Rs. 350.00 ). The petitioners filed objections in response to that notice. The objections were considered by the House Tax Sub Committee of the Municipal Committee and, vide order 26. 3. 1982, rent was determined at Rs. 200.00 per month and annual rental value was determined accordingly. The petitioners filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner against the order passed by the Municipal Committee, pleading therein that rental value may be fixed on the basis of the fair rent in accordance with the provisions of the Easweunjab Urban Rent Restriction Act.

(3.) THE petitioners'ss case precisely rests on the plea that the annual letting value of the shop in question could not be assessed at an amount which should be more than the fair rent under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. It has been pointed out that the shop in' question was an old structure and in existence since 1937. It was in self-occupation of the petitioners. It is further explained that no additions, alterations or improvements were effected in the shop. The petitioners have, therefore, put forward the plea that there was no justification to increase the annual letting value of the shop in question in the absence of any material on the record showing any addition or alteration in the ship and also because the annual rental value cannot be fixed on the basis of the present market value. "annual value" has been defined in clause (1) of Section 3 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. Sub-clause (b) of the clause (1) is relevant for the purposes of the question arising in the present petition and the said Sub-clause (b) read, prior to its amendment in the year 1994, as under: