1951 Supreme(Raj) 19

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Ranawat,Sharma
MANAK CHAND - Appellant
Versus
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL - Respondent
Petn. 15 Of 1950
Decided On : 01/25/1951

The imposition of property tax can be done only by the Municipal Board as is required by Section 77 of the Act. No other authority can perform this function, unless it can be shown that the Municipal Board validly delegated this function to some of its functionaries according to law which is not the case here.

Headnote:

PROPERTY TAX - Imposition - Assessment List - Liability to Pay - Certiorari - Prohibition - Misjoinder of Parties.

Fact of the Case:

The Municipal Council, Jaipur, passed a resolution for the imposition of property tax within the limitation of the Jaipur Municipality at the rate of 5% per annum on the letting value of the houses and lands. A Sub-Committee was also formed to draft the rules for the imposition of this tax and finally the rules, after they were framed, were published in the State Gazette on 15-9-1947 and objections Under section 78 (c) were invited by the Municipal Board. The Municipal Board, after having consd. all the objections that were filed, submitted a report to the Govt. for sanction of the property tax in accordance with the resolution of the municipality. The Govt. accorded its sanction to the proposal of the Municipality under Section 79 of the Act on 6-2-1948. The Municipal Board then published the rules and the Govt. sanction thereto in the Gazette, Under Section 80 of the act, on 1-3-1948, and it was also stated in the notfn. that the rules shall come into force on 1-6-1948. The rules, however, made provision for the levy of the tax at the rate of 6% on the annual letting value of all buildings and lands or both situated within the limits of the City of Jaipur Municipality. The Municipality appointed an Assessment Officer Under Section 81 of the Act, who proceeded to cause an assessment list of all buildings and lands to be prepared as is required under Section 82 of the Act from the 1st of June 1948. The list could not be completed before 24-12-1949. A notice was published in the Gazette on 24-121949 Under Section 84 of the Act, saying that the assessment list was complete and that it was open for inspection of the citizens within office hours at the municipal Office Jaipur. 9-2-1950 was fixed as the last date for the filing of the objections against the entries in the assessment list. The notice did not, however, specify the period to which the assessment list related and no time was given by it when the revn. authority was to proceed to revise the valuation of the assessment. The Municipal Council then sent bills Under Section 108 of the act to the petnrs. for the realization of property tax for three periods commencing from 1-6-1948 to 31-3-1950.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the Municipality did not impose any property tax as is required by Sections 77 and 80 of the Act, in so far as after obtaining the Govt. sanction the Municipality did not decide to impose the tax as no date was fixed for the imposition of the tax in the Notn. published Under section 80 of the Act. No assessment lists were published for each of the three periods of the tax. The notice published on 24-12-1949 also does not specify the period for which the assessment list was adopted. The date fixed for the filing of objections against the assessment list was 9-2-1950 and the notices in this behalf were served on the petnrs. in the months of March and April 1960. Thus the petnrs. could not avail of the opportunity given to them for the filing of objections, because the last date fixed for that purpose expired before the notices were served on them.

Issues: 1. Whether the Municipality had imposed any property tax as required by Sections 77 and 80 of the Act? 2. Whether assessment lists were published for each of the three periods of the tax? 3. Whether the notice published on 24-12-1949 specified the period for which the assessment list was adopted? 4. Whether the date fixed for the filing of objections against the assessment list was 9-2-1950 and the notices in this behalf were served on the petnrs. in the months of March and April 1960? 5. Whether the petnrs. could avail of the opportunity given to them for the filing of objections? 6. Whether the Municipality had the right to recover the property tax from the petnrs.?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Municipality did not impose any property tax as is required by Sections 77 and 80 of the Act, in so far as after obtaining the Govt. sanction the Municipality did not decide to impose the tax as no date was fixed for the imposition of the tax in the Notn. published Under section 80 of the Act. 2. The Court held that no assessment lists were published for each of the three periods of the tax. The notice published on 24-12-1949 also does not specify the period for which the assessment list was adopted. 3. The Court held that the date fixed for the filing of objections against the assessment list was 9-2-1950 and the notices in this behalf were served on the petnrs. in the months of March and April 1960. Thus the petnrs. could not avail of the opportunity given to them for the filing of objections, because the last date fixed for that purpose expired before the notices were served on them. 4. The Court held that the Municipality did not have the right to recover the property tax from the petnrs.

Final Decision: The Court ordered that a direction be issued to the opposite party not to recover the property tax from them, unless a valid tax is imposed by the Municipal Board of jaipur within the Muncipal limits of the City and is due according to the provi sions of the Jaipur Municipal Act.