Post-regularization, only normal tax rates are applicable with no penalties for unauthorized construction.

1. The petitioners are joint owners of the building bearing Door Nos.2232A (7 numbers), 2232B (7 numbers), 2232C (7 numbers), 2232D (7 numbers), (old XIII / 612A to 612D) in ward No.9 of the 2nd respondent Municipality. Earlier, Ext.P1 notice was issued to the petitioners by the 2nd respondent on 11/01/2016, alleging that the petitioner had carried out certain unauthorized construction in the said property. A reply was submitted to the same as per Ext.P2 by the petitioner, and the dispute with regard to the unauthorized construction was ultimately settled as per Ext.P10 order passed by the Government on 11/02/2022, directing regularization of the building. Ext.P11 is the order issued by the Town Planner for regularizing the building in compliance of Ext.P10 proceedings and Ext.P12 is the occupancy certificate issued after regularization of the unauthorized construction. As per the said certificate, the date of completion of the building was shown as 05/06/2000 and the date of occupancy was shown as 28/05/2022, meaning thereby that the construction is deemed to have been regularized with effect from 28/05/2022.

2. Thereafter, Ext.P13 series notice was issued to the petitioner, requiring the petitioner to pay the property tax along with twice the rate of tax treating the building as unauthorized. The said notice contained the period from 2016-2017, 2021-22 and 2022-2023. The matter was taken up by the Government and ultimately the Government issued Ext.P14 order, wherein the demand of the tax arrears were directed to be confined to the period from 2019-2020 onwards. Ext.P15 was issued by the 2nd respondent in such circumstances, demanding tax by three times for the period from 2019-2020 to 2022-2023. Immediately, on receipt of the same, the petitioners submitted Ext.P16 requesting for exemption from payment of the property tax. In the meantime, the petitioner had already remitted the tax. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court by filing this writ petition as there was inaction on the part of the respondents based on Ext.P16. The relief sought in this writ petition are as follows:

"issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P15 series and to quash the original of the same to the extent it, imposes penalty on the petitioners and demanding time barred property tax;

ii) to declare that the collection of time barred property tax as well as imposing penal changes on the building of the petitioners treating it as unauthorized even after the Ext. P10 to P12, is highly illegal and arbitrary;

iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction directing to respondents 2 to 4 to revise the levy of property tax on the petitioners after Ext.P10 to P12 and to refund the amount illegally collected from the petitioners by way of penal charges, compounding fee and time barred property tax along with interest as expeditiously as possible;

iv) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P16 as expeditiously as possible;

v) to issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case;

vi) to permit the petitioner to produce translations of the vernacular documents as and when directed by this Hon'ble Court; "

3. A counter affidavit was filed by the respondents 2 to 4, opposing the reliefs sought by the petitioner and disputing the averments in the writ petition.

4. I have heard Sri. K. Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. P. K. Ravisankar, learned standing counsel for the respondents 2 and 4 and Smt. Deepa K. R, learned Special Government Pleader.

5. One of the main contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitio