IMPORTANT POINTS
Sub-section (1) of Section 7A of the Act empower the Government to exempt an entertainment or class of entertainments, etc. from the levy entertainments tax, for reasons to be specified in the general or special order passed by the Government granting such exemption. Going by sub-section (2) of Section 7A, on such general or special order being passed, the local authority concerned shall be bound to comply with such order of exemption- If the reasons stated by the Government in granting exemption from the levy of entertainments tax is vitiated by arbitrary exercise of power or based on irrelevant or extraneous considerations, it would be open to the local authority concerned to challenge the same invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In order to exercise such right efficaciously, the reasons for granting such exemption should be made known to the local authority concerned.

JUDGMENT :

Petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P14 order dated 03.05.2019 of the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in Appeal No.153/2018.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is against the 3rd respondent, who is allegedly undertaking unauthorised constructions in his property, which is adjacent to the petitioner's property. The petitioner would contend that the said construction is in violation of the provisions of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 as also the provisions under the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999. The 2nd respondent, who is the Secretary of the 1st respondent Corporation issued Ext.P8 order of demolition dated 29.12.2017 under sub-section (3) of Section 406 of the Kerala Municipality Act. The said order was under challenge in Appeal No.153/2018 filed by the 3rd respondent before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. By Ext.P14 order, the Tribunal allowed that appeal and directed the 2nd respondent to take fresh steps for demolition of the unauthorised constructions made by the rd respondent, after issuing provisional order and show-cause notice under sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 406 of the Kerala Municipality Act. Paragraph Nos.7 and 8 and also last paragraph of Ext.P14 order read thus:

“7. Point No.(i) The impugned order produced as Ext.P3 is a confirmation order issued under Section 406(3) of the Municipality Act. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that prior to the issuance of the Ext.P8 appellant was not served with a provisional order and show cause notice as stipulated in Section 406(1) & (2) of the Municipality Act and since the procedure stipulated under Section 406 is not complied with the impugned order is unsustainable. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that a provisional order was issued to the appellant on 27.02.2017. It is true that copy of a provisional order dated 27.02.2017 is available in page No.69 of the file produced by the respondent. But no materials are available in the file produced by the 2nd respondent to substantiate that any such provisional order was served upon the appellant. More over in the impugned confirmation order also the provisional order is not shown as reference. In the absence of any evidence it cannot be found that a provisional order and show-cause notice was served upon the appellant. Therefore, it can only be found that the impugned demolition order under Section 406(3) was served upon the appellant without serving a provisional order and showcause notice to him, and thus violating the procedure stipulated in Section 406 of the Municipality Act. Therefore, the impugned order is legally unsustainable. This point is found accordingly.

8. Point No.(ii) Considering the finding in point No.(i) appeal is to be allowed. In the result, appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 29.12.2017 is set aside. Secretary is directed to take fresh steps for demolition after issuing a provisional order and showcause notice under Section 406(1) & (2) of the Kerala Municipality Act specifically describing the unauthorised construction effected by the appellant and rules violated, and on getting reply to the showcause notice respondent has to pass a confirmation order for demolition, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant and 3rd respondent and also after duly considering the explanation submitted by the appellant. Entire process has to be completed within a period of 30 days from this date of receipt of copy of this order.”

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation, representing respondents 1 and 2.

4. The sole issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether any interference is warranted on Ext.P14 order dated 03.05.2019 of the Tribunal in Appeal No.153/2018.

5. The reasoning of the Tribunal in Ext.P14 order, which is extracted h