A demand notice for arrears of ground rents and advertisement tax can only be issued to the person liable to pay such arrears.

The petitioner was granted permission to erect hoardings

and pole ads on lease by agreement dated 5.2.1998 subject to

certain terms and conditions. Since the petitioner did not pay the

arrears of ground rent and advertisement tax as specified under

Section 134 of Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (for

short `Act'), the 3rd respondent issued a demand notice calling

upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,35,29,183/-. Being

aggrieved, this writ petition is filed.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

the petitioner was permitted to erect the hoardings and pole ads

in the name of M/s.Murthy Arts. However, the impugned

demand notice issued calling upon the petitioner to pay the

ground rents and advertisement tax in respect of the hoardings

erected by third parties is not sustainable.

3.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent - Corporation would submit that the hoardings

3

erected by the other advertising agencies are the sister concern

of the petitioner and as such the impugned demand notice issued

by the 3rd respondent - Corporation is in accordance with Section

134 of the Act.

4.

Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing

for the State would reiterate the submission made by the learned

counsel for the 3rd respondent.

5.

I have considered the submissions made by the

learned counsel for the parties.

6.

It is not in dispute that the petitioner was permitted

to erect the hoardings and pole ads on lease by agreement basis

with the respondent No.3 subject to payment of ground rents and

advertisement tax. However, the demand notice has been issued

by the 3rd respondent calling upon the petitioner to pay a sum of

Rs.1,35,29,183/-

towards

arrears

of

ground

rents

and

advertisement tax.

7.

A perusal of the impugned demand notice indicates

that the arrears of ground rents and advertisement tax pertains

to other advertising agencies and it is not confined only to the

4

petitioner. The contention of the 3rd respondent is that the other

advertising agencies are the sister concerns of the petitioner and

as such, the impugned demand notice has been issued.

However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

other advertising agencies are not the sister concerns of the

petitioner. When such being the case, the respondent -

Corporation could not have issued the demand notice calling

upon the petitioner to pay the ground rents and advertisement

tax payable by other advertising agencies.

8.

The petitioner's contention is that the arrears of

ground rents and advertisement tax are determined without

issuing notice to the petitioner. The respondent - Corporation is

unable to demonstrate before this Court that the petitioner was

issued with notice before determining the ground rents and

advertisement tax payable by the petitioner. Hence, the demand

notice as well as the certificate insofar as it relates to the

petitioner require to be quashed. Accordingly, I pass the

following;

ORDER

i)

Writ petition is allowed;

5

ii)

The impugned certificate dated 26.3.2011 at Annexure-L

and communication dated 7.3.2011 at Annexure-K insfoar as it

relates to the petitioner - advertising agency issued by the 3rd

respondent requesting the 1st respondent to recover the ground

rents and advertisement tax payable by the petitioner as arrears

of land revenue stand quashed and consequently the order dated

29.3.2011 at Annexure-B passed by the 1st respondent insofar

as it relates to the petitioner stands quashed and the impugned

notice dated 20.4.2011 at Annexure-A issued by the 2nd

respondent insofar as it relates to the petitioner also stands

quashed.

iii)

The arrears of ground rents and advertisement tax

demanded by the respondent - Corporation requires to be re-

determined after providing an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner.

iv)

Liberty is reserved with the 3rd respondent to enforce the

certificate dated 7.3.2011 issued by the 3rd respondent -

Corporation

and

also

consequential

notice

a