APHC010246362018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3333]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO. 10857 OF 2018 Between:

Annabathina Venkata Subba Rao ...PETITIONER AND Municipal Corporation Of Ongole ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. GHANTA SRIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent:

1. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP)

The Court made the following:

ORDER :

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“.... to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in straightaway issuing the impugned notice dated 24.03.2018 under Section 269(2) of The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 without there being any bill that too without disposing of earlier petitioner‟s objections, as arbitrary, illegal, in violation of well settled principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of The Great Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and rules made thereunder and in utter violation of well settled principles of natural justice …...” 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

a) The petitioner is the owner of the land admeasuring 306 Godhies (equivalent to 2448 sq.yards) of site abutting the bypass road, within the limits of the respondent Corporation. Initially, the petitioner has constructed a shed in the said site and the same was assessed to property tax with assessment No.103500760 and Door No.8/497 was assigned to the said premises. Thereafter, in the year 2011, the petitioner has demolished the said shed and proposed for construction of pacca RCC building. As such, he has submitted an application for grant of permission for construction of RCC roof hotel building with Cellar + Ground + three upper floors and the said application was forwarded by the respondent Corporation to the Director of Town and Country Planning for technical approval. Accordingly, the Director of Town and Country Planning granted technical approval subject to various other conditions mentioned therein. While so, as there is a change in the land use, the petitioner has submitted a revised plan for construction of a commercial building and the respondent Corporation has sanctioned the plan for construction of building consisting of cellar + Ground + three upper floors. In pursuance of which, the petitioner has commenced the construction of the said building, in accordance with the plan, as sanctioned by the respondent Corporation.

b) While so, the respondent Corporation issued a Special Notice proposing to revise the property tax in respect of the premises No.8/497 retrospectively even for the period for which period the property tax was already paid. Challenging which, when the respondent was insisting upon the payment of the aforesaid demand, the petitioner was constrained to file W.P.No.5947 of 2015 and a Division Bench of this Court has disposed of the said writ petition vide orders dated 13.03.2015. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:

“In the event, the petitioner deposits 50% of the demanded amount within three weeks from date then the Municipal Corporation shall consider his representation in accordance with law and pass a speaking order, after giving an opportunity of hearing and production of all material documents. In the process fresh decision shall be taken with regard to the demand. The deposit so to be made will abide by the result of such decision. In default of depositing the amount within the time as above, it would be open for the Municipal Corporation to proceed to recover the demanded amount in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be completed within six weeks from the date of deposit of the amount.”

c) In pursuance of the said order, the petitioner deposited an amount of Rs.1,49,007/- which in f