ORDER.-The petitioner prays for a writ of mandamus ‘from this Court to restrain the respondents herein from levying, revising or collecting the property tax on the land and buildings belonging to the petitioners at No. 83, Big Street, Madras - 5 on the basis of its plinth area, contrary to the provisions of the Madras City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.

2. The first respondent is the State of Tamil Nadu and the second respondent is the Corporation of Madras. According to the petitioner as soon as he came to know that the Corporation of Madras had proposed to revise the property tax leviable on the properties in the City of Madras adopting the plinth area as the basis, he wrote to respondents 1 and 2, as a rate-payer, as the representative of the City Cleaning Campaign, and as the Secretary of the Native Residents Association of the Madras City, pointing out that the Corporation has no jurisdiction to assess levy or collect property tax on the basis of the plinth area as it would tantamount to levying a tax on the property and not its rental value. The second respondent, however, without giving any reply to the said letter, proceeded to issue a circular purporting to be the guidelines for its executive staff directing that tax should be reckoned at 30 paise per sq. ft. of plinth area for owner occupied buildings and 45 to 50 paise for tenanted buildings. Apprehending that his property also will be assessed to property tax on plinth area basis as per the said guidelines issued by the Corporation he has approached this Court for the relief aforesaid.

3. A preliminary objection was taken by the respondents to the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has got alternative remedy to challenge any assessment that may be made on his property. This preliminary objection has been considered and rejected in my order dated 23rd August, 1977. The only question now to be considered is whether the Corporation is adopting plinth area basis for assessment of property tax in the City of Madras as alleged by the petitioner.

4. The petitioner’s first contention is that the Corporation has issued guidelines to its executive staff, i.e., the Subordinate Revenue Officers and assessors directing them to reckon the property tax at 30 paise per sq. ft. of plinth area for owner occupied building and 45 to 50 paise for tenanted buildings, that such a mode of assessment is illegal as it is contrary to section 100 of the Madras City Municipal Corporation Act, and that such assessments based on the plinth area have been consistently held to be bad by the Supreme Court and other High Courts. Secondly, it is contended that in any event the rate per sq. ft. suggested in the guidelines is also highly arbitrary, irrational and economically burdensome that the revision of property tax assessment on the above basis has in fact resulted in the half-yearly tax going up by three to five times the existing tax without any justification, that such oppressive assessments will ultimately result in the total annihilation of all property owners in the course of next five years and that therefore, the annual value should be fixed only with reference to the fair rent formula contemplated by the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, as has been held in a series of cases by the Supreme Court. Thirdly, it is contended that the proposed revision of property tax being quinquennial, any revision in the annual value can only be for specific grounds such as increase in the area of the building, increase in rent, additions or alterations in the building etc., that the annual value of the building cannot suddenly increase four to five times merely because the assessing authority wants to increase the tax and that in most of the assessments so far made in relation to some properties, the annual value has been increased without giving any specific ground which has occasioned the enhancement of the annual value.

5. The second respondent filed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document