By the Court.—We have heard Shri Madhur Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondents. Shri Satendra Kumar Pandey appears for Nagar Palika Parishad, Rampur.

2. In these writ petitions the petitioners have challenged the notices issued on 3.11.2009 and the recovery proceedings of the rent of the shops owned by Nagar Palika Parishad and allotted to the petitioner, as arrears of land revenue. By an interim order dated 3.11.2009 the recovery proceedings in view of the judgment of this Court in Titu Singh v. District Magistrate/Collector, Mathura and others, 2003 (5) AWC 3479, were stayed.

3. The respondents have not filed counter-affidavit. Learned counsel for Nagar Palika Parishad prays for some more time to file counter-affidavit. Since the petitioners have not disputed the amount, which is due from them and have only challenged the method of recovery of the amount as arrears of land revenue by issuing recovery certificate/ citation dated 14.9.2009 (as arrears of land revenue), we do not propose to adjourn the matter. We have heard the counsels appearing for the parties, on legal issues.

4. The Nagar Palika Parishad, Swar, Distt. Rampur constructed 28 shops and proposed to allow them by auction. The petitioners were highest bidders in the auction held on 10.11.1998, of the respective shops, for allotment on rent ranging between the maximum amount of Rs. 2150/- to the minimum of Rs. 725/-. The shops were allotted to them, as tenants on rent w.e.f. July, 1999.

5. The petitioners, thereafter, took a stand that the amount of bids was very high, and filed civil suits before entering into agreement and taking possession of the shops. The civil suits were dismissed. The petitioners have not brought on record the judgments of the civil suits. The petitioners, thereafter, entered into agreement and affirmed affidavits accepting the tenancy and rate of rent before taking possession, and are paying rent regularly w.e.f. 17.11.2006. The matter in issue relates only to the arrears of rent from July 1999 to 17.11.2006.

6. In the letter of the District Magistrate dated 8.1.2008 sent to the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Swar annexed as Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition it is mentioned that suits filed by the petitioners in respect of shop Nos. 1, 15 and 16 have been dismissed, in favour of Nagar Palika Parishad; and that the representation made by the petitioners forwarded by the Nagar Palika Board on 19.5.2001, and 12.8.2004, have been rejected by the State Government. The rent for the period from July 1999 to 16.11.2006 is due and should be recovered from the tenants.

7. On the receipt of the letter of the District Magistrate dated 8.1.2008, the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Swar issued notices of demand to the petitioners of the agreed amount for each of the shop. The petitioners were required to deposit the entire amount in seven days, failing which their shops will be locked, and the amount will be recovered as arrears of land revenue. A citation was, thereafter, issued by the Tehsidlar, Swar on 14.9.2009 under Rule 236 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act to recover the amount giving rise to the writ petition.

8. Shri Madhur Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the opinion of this Court in the judgment in Titu Singh v. District Magistrate, 2003 (5) AWC 3479, in which it was held while interpreting the provisions of Section 173 (A) of U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916, applicable to the petitioners that the sums due to the Municipal Corporation payable a contractor in pursuance to theka money due under a contract cannot be recovered under Section 173-A.

Section 173A is quoted as below :

“173-A. Recovery of taxes as arrears of land revenue.—(1) Where any sum is due on account of a tax, other than [any tax] payable upon immediate demand, from a person to a [Municipality], the [Municipality] may without prejudice to any other mode o