IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE RESERVED ON: 01.05.2025 DELIVERED ON: 20.05.2025 PRESENT:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH W.P.O. 1227 OF 2024 TANWEER EBADULLAH VERSUS THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

Appearance:-

Mr. Raghunath Chakraborty, Adv.

Mr. Supratik Shyamal, Adv.

Ms. Manisha Nath, Adv.

Mrs. Sonali Sengupta, Adv.

………….…..For the Petitioner.

Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee, Adv.

Ms. Piyali Sengupta, Adv.

………..…………….…..For K.M.C.

JUDGMENT Gaurang Kanth, J.

1. The petitioner, by way of the present writ petition, challenges the revised annual valuation and consequential property tax demand raised by the respondent corporation in respect of the premises bearing No. 7/1, Topsia Road, associated with assessee numbers 110592207102, 110592208490, 110592208349, 110592208337, and 110592201525 on the ground that the same pertains to a period beyond the permissible limitation of three years.

2. The facts leading to the present writ petition are as follows:

3. The petitioner submits that he is the owner of five apportioned units situated at premises no. 7/1, Topsia Road (South), Kolkata. The said ownership has been acquired through duly executed deeds of gift and conveyance. According to the records maintained by the municipal corporation, the mutation of the respective assessee numbers stands as follows:

(i) Assessee Nos. 110592207102 and 110592208337 stand mutated in the name of the Petitioner;

(ii) Assessee No. 110592201525 stands mutated in the name of Khalid Edadullah;

(iii) Assessee Nos. 110592208490 and 110592208349 stand mutated in the name of Fazal Edadullah.

4. After acquiring ownership, the petitioner has, from time to time, made payments towards the property tax. According to the petitioner he paid Rs. 5,00,000/- on 20.07.2023 qua Assessee No. 110592208349, Rs.4,50,000 qua Assessee Nos. 110592207102 vide various cheques dated 28.08.2023, 11.12.2023, 07.03.2024 and Rs. 2,00,000/- on 01.10.2024 dated qua Assessee No.110592208337.

5. On 20.11.2024, he visited the office of the respondent corporation and submitted two demand drafts totaling Rs. 20,95,000/- towards outstanding dues. At that time, officials of the respondent corporation informed him that a sum of Rs. 1,18,06,993/-, comprising property tax, interest, and penalty, was outstanding against the said five assessee numbers. He was further informed that warrants of distress were likely to be issued. Under pressure from the municipal officials, the petitioner was compelled to provide an undertaking dated 20.11.2024, undertaking to clear the entire outstanding amount by December 2024.

6. Subsequently, on 21.11.2024, the petitioner deposited an additional sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- via demand draft towards the outstanding dues.

7. In order to verify the dues, the petitioner accessed the demand details pertaining to the above-mentioned assessee numbers. He discovered that in respect of assessee nos. 110592207102, 110592208349, and 110592201525, the outstanding demand relates to the period commencing from 2009–2010, i.e., over one and a half decades ago. In respect of assessee nos. 110592208490 and 110592208337, the demands pertain to periods starting from 2019 and 2020, respectively.

8. The petitioner contends that, in terms of Section 573 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, the respondent corporation is legally entitled to recover dues only within three years from the date the sum fell due. Therefore, any demand predating February 2021 is time-barred and non-recoverable under the law.

9. The petitioner further states that the respondent corporation has arbitrarily and unilaterally revised the annual valuation of the property and enhanced the property tax without affording him an opportunity of hearing. Such action is in violation of the principles of natural justice.

10. The petitioner, through a legal notice dated 10.12.2024, requested the respondent corporation to grant an opportunity of hearing and to pass a reasoned o