Failure to follow procedural mandates when imposing property tax renders demand notices invalid.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed captioned writ petition seeking to challenge Exts.P2 and P3 demand notices issued for realization of property tax for the period from first half of 2019 to the first half of 2022.

2. Heard Sri.Reji Mathew, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Deepa, Special Government Pleader (LSGD), Sri.Manoj Ramaswamy, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 and 3.

3. The petitioner has contented that the demand raised as per Exts.P2 and P3 is without following the mandate under the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Property Tax, Service Cess and Surcharge) Rules , 2011 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules’. Therefore, issue has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Perinthalmanna Municipality v. Abdul Kareem [2025 (4) KLT 888] and Thrissur Corporation v. Sangeetha Hotels [ 2025 (4) KLT 274 ] holding that unless and until the procedures contemplated under Section 233 of the Kerala Municipality Act , 1994 read with Rules 4 and 10 of the Rules are followed, the tax could not be imposed.

In such circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition setting aside Exts.P2 and P3. There will be a direction to the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents to pass fresh orders after taking into account the principles laid down by this Court in Perinthalmanna Municipality (supra) and Thrissur Corporation (supra) judgments.

Sd/-