JUDGMENT :

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent culminating in the two ‘Notice to Occupiers’ dated 01.07.2009 issued to the second and third respondents in respect of the building at No. 787, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002 and quash the same.

1. The writ on hand is filed questioning the validity of the notice issued to the occupiers of the building under Rule 29, Schedule IV of the Chennai City Municipal Act IV of 1919.

2. The petitioners are the absolute owners of the property consisting of a building at Door No. 787, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002.

3. The petitioners state that a building was assessed to property tax and they were paying the same. However, it is stated that the property tax was paid whenever it is demanded and there was no subsequent demand raised by the respondent-Corporation and for that period, the petitioners have not paid their property tax.

4. The respondents demanded enhanced property tax at the rate of Rs. 1,28,516.60 per half year for the period 2/1991-1992 to 1/1998-1999.

5. The petitioners filed W.P. No. 17902 of 1998 and the said writ petition was disposed of on 27.11.2006 with the direction to pay the property tax for the period 2/1991-1992 and 1/1998-1999. The petitioners were provided with an opportunity to submit their objections and accordingly the abovesaid writ petition was disposed of.

6. Meanwhile, the petitioners remitted the tax amount of Rs. 2,57,074/- to the second respondent.

7. It is not in dispute that the property belongs to the petitioners were assessed to property tax and in the earlier writ petition, the petitioners were provided with an opportunity to submit their objections, if any for further consideration by the Authorities Competent. That being the position, the impugned notice was issued to the occupiers, who were the tenants during the relevant point of time and the said occupiers' notice is under challenge in the present writ petition.

8. This Court is of the considered opinion that under the provisions of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919, once the property is assessed, the owners are liable to pay tax in accordance with the provisions of the Act. If at all they are aggrieved from and out of the assessment for determination of tax, they are bound to prefer an appeal before the Appellate Authority or before the Appellate Taxation Committee under the provisions of the Act.

9. However, in the present case, the initial assessment was self-assessment and therefore, the question of preferring an appeal would not arise at all. Thus, the petitioners are bound to pay the property tax as per the self-assessment made and in respect of the revised assessment now made by the Corporation, the petitioners are at liberty to file their objections, if any, before the Competent Authority.

10. In view of the efflux of time and the present writ petition was filed in the year 2009 and pending for about 12 years, this Court directed the respondent-Corporation to conduct a fresh inspection and accordingly, passed a revised assessment order, enabling the petitioners to proceed further in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

11. Pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court, the respondent-Corporation conducted an inspection in the premises of the petitioners and submitted an Inspection Report and the contentions in the said Inspection Report are extracted as under:

“Inspection Report

Ref: W.P. No. 17336 of 2009

..........

As per the direction of the Hon'ble High Court in W.P. No. 17336 of 2009, an inspection was carried on 25.08.2021 at 11.00 A.M. at Door No. 53 (Old No. 787), Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002 bearing property tax assessment Bill No. 05-063-00379-000 (Old Bill No. 06-082-0053-000 before delimitation of Chennai Corpora