The main legal point established was the application of the limitation period for recovery of taxes under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 and the Limitation Act, 1963, and the impact of the government notification on exemption.

1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the bills (Annexures P-3/1-P3/11) whereby Municipal Council, Noormahal is alleged to have raised illegal demand against the water supply for the period 2006 to 2013 which had already been exempted by respondent No. 2. In brief, facts of the case are to the effect that the petitioners are residents of area falling within the limits of Municipal Council Noormahal. They have constructed their houses in an area about five marlas (125Sqyds.) each. Earlier they were required to pay bills for supply of water but in the year 2006 Government of Punjab issued a notification dated 11.07.2006 (Annexure P-1) whereby residential units having plot area upto 5 marlas were exempted from payment of water and sewerage charges. However respondent No. 2-Municipal Council issued bills on account of water charge vide impugned Annexures P-3/1-P3/11. It is the case of the petitioners that bills have been issued for the years from 2006 to 2013 illegally on the basis of a letter issued by the President of the Municipal Council on the basis of alleged door to door survey of houses. During the survey, it has been found that some of the houses are marginally above five Marlas and they were required to pay water and sewerage charges but due to the mistake of officials of the Municipal Council, they were exempted from payment of water bills. It is averred that recovery of the water charges beyond three years is not permissible and is barred by limitation.

2. Upon notice respondents appeared and filed written statement taking a stand that as per notification (Annexure P-l) all the houses whose plot area is up to 5 Marlas(125 Sq. Yds.) are exempted from payment of water bills. The area of the houses of the petitioners is more than five marlas and they are well liable to pay the water bills. A proclamation was made in the area of Municipal limits that only houses up to 5 Marlas are exempted from payment of water rates. The petitioners did not pay the water bills treating it as exempted, although area of their houses is more than five marlas, as such the houses of the petitioners are not exempted from payment of water bills. The resolution passed by the Municipal Council has been suspended by the Deputy Director, Local Government and affirmed by the Director, Local Government. It is also the stand of the Deputy Director in reply that as per the Revenue Department area of one Maria is equal to 272 sq. ft. whereas government has fixed an area of one Maria equal to 225 sq. ft. In view of this, houses of the petitioners are not exempted from payment of water bills.

3. Petitioners filed rejoinder to the short reply of the Municipal Council denying the averments in the short reply and reiterating the averments in the writ petition.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the bills issued for payment of water charges are from years 2006 to 2013. Learned counsel further contended that since demand raised vide impugned annexures is beyond three years, therefore, no recovery of arrears of water bills can be affected. Only legally recoverable dues can be recovered. Learned counsel further contended that the petitioners had already paid their bills for the years 2011 to 2013. In order to substantiate her contentions, learned counsel relied upon judgments of this Court in Municipal Committee, Bhatinda v. Jaswant Rai and others, 1990(2) PLR 402 and Municipal Corporation, Bathinda v. Parmeshwari Devi, 2007 (5) R.C.R. (Civil) 838. The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is with regard to limitation.

6. Per contra, the learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 vehemently contended that recovery can be effected beyond three years as the plot area of petitioners' houses is more than five marlas and are not exempted as