A lawyer's office is not considered a commercial establishment under the Commercial Establishment Act, 1960.

ORDER :

1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order dated 19.10.2013 passed by the learned 13th Additional District Judge, Vadodara the respondent – Corporation assailed the said order by preferring the Regular Civil Appeal No.69 of 2011. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 19.10.2012 the writ-applicant herein has approached this Court by filing present writ-application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs :-

“(A) admit this petition;

(B) issue appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 19/10/2013 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.69/2011 passed by the learned 13th Addl. District Judge, Vadodara allowing the Appeal preferred by the respondent authorities reversing the order dated 4/7/2009 passed in Tax Appeal No. 18/2008 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara in the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances and be pleased to hold that the order passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge dated 4/7/2009 passed in Tax Appeal No. 18/2008 is just and proper in the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances;

(C) pending admission of this petition be pleased to pass interim order staying further operation, implementation and execution of the order dated 19/10/2013 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.69/2011 passed by the learned 13th Addl. District Judge, Vadodara till the aforesaid petition is finally heard and decided;

(D) pass such orders as thought fit in the interest of justice.”

2. The order dated 4.7.2009 passed in Tax Appeal No.18 of 2008 reads thus :-

“ORDER

This Appeal is hereby allowed.

The Respondent Vadodara Municipal Corporation is hereby directed to re-assess the assessment of tax which the Municipal Corporation has made for the premises in dispute bearing Municipal Census NO.05 01150 043 000 020 being Flat NO.204 "SANKALP COMPLEX" situated in Ma ' i Mata's Lane, Palace Road, Vadodara, treating it as the premises other than the residential. Instead of that, it shall be assessed as the residential premises and a fresh tax bill to be given to the Appellant for the period in respect of the disputed Tax Bills Dated 4-2-2008 with BilIs No. 890 & 889, for the year 2007- 2008. The Appellant is directed to pay the amount of reassessed tax bill-within 15 (Fifteen) days after receipt of the fresh tax bill from the Respondent. The amount so deposited shall be adjusted in the re-assessed tax bill. If the amount so deposited is more than the re-assessed tax bill, the remaining balance amount shall be credited in the next tax bill.

No order as to costs.

Pronounced in the open Court today on this 4th Day of the Month of July, 2009.”

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ-application read thus :-

3.1 The property being Flat No.4 situated on the 2nd floor of Sankalp Complex, Mari Mata Street, Raj Mahel Road, Vadodara was purchased by the writ-applicant by registered Sale Deed on 14.12.1999. The said premises admeasured 81 sq.mtrs. It is the case of the writ-applicant that the property in question was used by the writ-applicant for residential purpose upto 2006- 2007.

3.2 The property in question came to be assessed and the respondent authority assessed the property as non-residential property and raised the bills which are duly produced at page-37 considering the premise as non-residential premise for the year 2007-08 being Municipal Census No.05 01 150 043000 101 and PIN No.05 00391 101. It is the case of the writ-applicant that the writ-applicant is shown as tenant in the aforesaid premises. It is the case of the writ-applicant that the said property is used by the husband of the writ-applicant who is in profession of lawyer and it is a lawyer’s office.

4. Heard Mr. A. V. Prajapati, the learned advocate appearing for Mr. N. K. Majmudar, the learned advocate appearing for the writ-applicant and Mr. Nilesh Pandya, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent authority.

5. Mr. A. V. Prajapati, the