RAI VIMAL KRISHNA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioners in this case are residents of town of Patna whose family, as claimed by them commands respect and owns substantial property in the shape of different holdings of Patna Municipal Corporation hereinafter referred to as the Corporation' situated in the new circle. The details of their various holdings is mentioned in a chart (Annexure -1). They appear to be aggrieved by imposition and recovery of Municipal tax at new rates on account of new assessment rates of 1993 (Annexure 17). The aforesaid rules entitled as the Assessment of Annual Rental Value of Holdings Rules, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1993), were notified on 12th August. 1993 and are effective from 13.8.1993.

(2.) The validity of the Rules of 1993 is not in challenge in this writ application and it was admitted at Bar that the validity of these rules have been upheld by the Supreme Court. A perusal of the 1993 Rules issued in exercise of powers conferred by Section 227 read with Sub -sections (i) & (ii) of Section 130 of Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) shows that the rules classify holdings in the Corporation area on the basis of situation of the holding, use of the buildings and type of constructions. It also provides methods of calculation of carpet area for commutation of Annual Rental Value of a Holding. The annual rental value is provided as a multiple of the carpet area and the rental value, the rates whereof is also fixed under the 1993 Rules by the Corporation with the prior approval of the State Government having regard to the situation, use and type of constructions of the holdings. The rules also prescribe the rate of tax at which the municipal tax shall be assessed -on the basis of annual rental value and the Corporation has been given the power to revise the rate of tax from time to time with prior approval of the State Government.

(3.) The main grievances of the petitioners in this writ application are tax two fold. Firstly, that the provisions of Sections 133, 134 and 137 of the Act have not been followed by the Corporation in the matter of preparation of valuation list and assessment list and secondly that the publication of notice of assessment has not been done in the manner prescribed by Section 149(i) of the Act and an off -shoot of the second grievance is that even the newspaper publication of notice of assessment under Section 149 of the Act is not uniform in the sense that different notices for different areas of Corporation have been published on different dates and for small area, allegedly of 17 circles out of more than 270 circles, still remains to be notified under Section 149 of the Act. Thus, a grievance has also been made that the notice of assessment published in the newspapers vide Annexures -5 to 7 should not have been on different dates because liability of new rates of municipal taxes, as per Section 138(2) of the Act would be effective from the date on which the list takes effect in the Corporation and that would be the date of publication of notice of assessment under Section 149 of the Act. According to the petitioners, such action of the Corporation violates Articles 14 of the Constitution of India by imposing new rates of taxes from different dates Upon similar holding situated in different areas' of the Corporation.