( 1. ) PETITIONERS in this writ petition are assailing the imposition of the property tax under self assessment scheme and imposition of urban development cess and education cess my Municipal Corporation, Bhopal.

( 2. ) PETITIONER No. 1 is Housing Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of M. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Petitioner No. 2 H. K. Rabra is a member of the society. The object of the society is to provide residential plots to its members. Municipal Corporation, Bhopal, is duly established Corporation under the M. P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). Section 132 of the Act provides the taxes which can be imposed under the Act. Petitioner submits that under Section 133 of the Act Corporation by resolution at the time of final adoption of the budget estimates and for the next financial year may impose any of the taxes or fees specified in the Act or increase the rate of taxes or fees already imposed. Section 136 deals with the imposition of the property tax. There are certain exemptions granted under Section 136 of the Act. Section 138 prescribes the procedure for determination of annual letting value of land or building. Petitioners submit that property tax has to be determined on the basis of the annual letting value in accordance with Section 138 of the Act. The final authority vests in the Municipal Corporation. The composition of Municipal Corporation is prescribed under Section 9 of the Act. The State Government in exercise of powers conferred under Section 423 read with Section 133 of the Act has made Rules for determination of the annual letting value of the lands and buildings. The Rules are called as M. P. Municipalities (determination of Annual Letting Value of buildings/lands) Rules, 1997. Rules have been amended time to time. Rule 6 of the Rules of 1997 requires the Corporation to adopt a resolution at the time of commencement of financial year and not later than six months therefrom for imposition of property tax at a rate which should not be less than six percent and more than 10%. Rule 10 deals with self assessment of property tax. Rule 11 provides for scrutiny of return and with a penal clause.

( 3. ) PETITIONERS case is that Municipal Corporation, Bhopal, did not pass any resolution as required under Section 132 of the Act read with Rule 6 of the Rules, 1997 for prescribing the rate of property tax and the mode and manner in which the Municipal area was proposed to be divided in four zones Mayor in Council of Municipal Corporation, Bhopal, passed a resolution on 14-4-2000 whereby the Municipal area of Bhopal was divided in four zones and the rate on which the property tax was sought to be imposed in said zones was also prescribed. Petitioners submit that Mayor in Council has no authority in law to pass any resolution in regard to imposition of property tax or for matter divisional or municipal area in different zones. The said resolution was published in newspapers P-2 and P-3. Objections were preferred which were not considered by the Appeal Committee. The Mayor in Council passed the resolution on 23-2-2001. As per resolution a final notification P-4 was published. Petitioners further submit that mayor in Council has also levied urban development cess and education cess as per receipt P-6.

( 4. ) PETITIONERS further submit that the criteria prescribed for determination of annual letting value is unreasonable and arbitrary. The manner of dividing Municipal area of Bhopal in different zones is illogical, irrational and improper in as much as areas having immense commercial value have been clubbed together and kept in one zone. The well developed commercial area has been clubbed with up commercial developed area. Some instances have been given in para 5. 20.

( 5. ) PETITIONERS further submit that the urban development cess was imposed by the State Government for the first time under an Act of the State Legislature known as the M. P. Upkar Adh