Trust Jay Dayal Shriniwas Dharmshala Th:rajkumar Gidwani Vs. Municipal Corporation Mundwara - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1051684
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnOct-31-2012
AppellantTrust Jay Dayal Shriniwas Dharmshala Th:rajkumar Gidwani
RespondentMunicipal Corporation Mundwara
Excerpt:
w.p.no.11382 / 2012 (trust jai dayal shriniwas, katni---vs..municipal corporation, katni & another) 31-10-2012 shri sourabh shrivastava and shri pratyush tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner. the petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the show cause notice issued to the petitioner under section 174(1) of the m.p.municipal corporation act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') dated 15-2-2012 asking the petitioner to deposit a sum of rs.2,82,541.38 towards the outstanding property tax and the subsequent demand notice and proposed attachment issued by the authorities under sections 175/178 of the act dated 11-7-2012. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a public charitable trust and is managing a dharmashala situated in katni which is exempted from levy of property tax under section 136(e) of the act. it is also submitted that the petitioner pursuant to the show cause notice under section 174(1) of the act had filed a reply bringing this fact to the notice of the authorities of the respondent/corporation but the authorities, without taking into consideration the said objection/reply of the petitioner have issued the notice of attachment which is contrary to law. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of the aforesaid facts the respondent/ authorities be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's reply to the show cause notice by passing a reasoned order before proceeding any further in the matter. i have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record. looking to the fact that no order on the representation/reply filed by the petitioner to the show cause notice has been passed by the respondent/corporation and as there is nothing on record to indicate that the concerned authorities has applied his mind to the issue raised by the petitioner regarding exemption from payment of property tax under section 136 of the act, therefore, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction, to the respondent/municipal corporation, katni, to take into consideration the reply to the show cause notice filed by the petitioner and thereafter pass a reasoned order after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and considering the contention raised by him regarding exemption under section 136(e) of the act in accordance with law before proceeding any further in the matter. to enable the respondent/authorities to do so the petitioner is directed to serve a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition on the concerned authority within two weeks of obtaining the same. it is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner and, therefore, the concerned authority, while deciding the objection/representation of the petitioner, would be at liberty to take into consideration all facts and facets of the case and thereafter take a decision thereon in accordance with law. with the aforesaid directions the petition filed by the petitioners stands disposed of. c.c.as per rules. (r.s.jha) judge mct
Judgment:

W.P.No.11382 / 2012 (Trust Jai Dayal Shriniwas, Katni---Vs..Municipal Corporation, Katni & another) 31-10-2012 Shri Sourabh Shrivastava and Shri Pratyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the show cause notice issued to the petitioner under Section 174(1) of the M.P.Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') dated 15-2-2012 asking the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.2,82,541.38 towards the outstanding property tax and the subsequent demand notice and proposed attachment issued by the authorities under Sections 175/178 of the Act dated 11-7-2012.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a public charitable trust and is managing a Dharmashala situated in Katni which is exempted from levy of property tax under Section 136(e) of the Act.

It is also submitted that the petitioner pursuant to the show cause notice under Section 174(1) of the Act had filed a reply bringing this fact to the notice of the authorities of the respondent/Corporation but the authorities, without taking into consideration the said objection/reply of the petitioner have issued the notice of attachment which is contrary to law.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of the aforesaid facts the respondent/ authorities be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's reply to the show cause notice by passing a reasoned order before proceeding any further in the matter.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record.

Looking to the fact that no order on the representation/reply filed by the petitioner to the show cause notice has been passed by the respondent/Corporation and as there is nothing on record to indicate that the concerned authorities has applied his mind to the issue raised by the petitioner regarding exemption from payment of property tax under Section 136 of the Act, therefore, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction, to the respondent/Municipal Corporation, Katni, to take into consideration the reply to the show cause notice filed by the petitioner and thereafter pass a reasoned order after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and considering the contention raised by him regarding exemption under Section 136(e) of the Act in accordance with law before proceeding any further in the matter.

To enable the respondent/authorities to do so the petitioner is directed to serve a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition on the concerned authority within two weeks of obtaining the same.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner and, therefore, the concerned authority, while deciding the objection/representation of the petitioner, would be at liberty to take into consideration all facts and facets of the case and thereafter take a decision thereon in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid directions the petition filed by the petitioners stands disposed of.

C.C.as per rules.

(R.S.Jha) Judge mct