W.A.(MD)No.1136 of 2014

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 20.07.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

W.A.(MD)No.1136 of 2014

and

M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014

St.Little Flower Matric Higher

Secondary School,

Rep. By its Principal,

No.3/270, Tajore Main Road (North Side),

North Kattur, Thiruchirappalli-19.

...Appellant

/Vs./

1.The Commissioner,

Thiruchirappalli Municpal Corporation,

Thiruchirappalli.

2.The Assistant Commissioner,

Thiruchirappalli Municipal Corporation,

Ariyamangalam Zone,

Thiruchirappalli.

...Respondents

PRAYER:- Writ Appeal - filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent Act, to

set aside the order dated 30.07.2014 in W.P.(MD)No.636 of 2013 on the

file of this Court and allow the writ petition as prayed for.

1/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.(MD)No.1136 of 2014

For Appellant

: Mr.R.Harihara Selvan

for Mr.T.Cibi Chakkaraborthy

For Respondents

: No Appearance

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.)

Heard Mr.R.Harihara Selvan, learned counsel for the appellant.

There is no appearance on behalf of Tiruchirappalli Municipal

Corporation, despite service being complete and the description of the

respondents being printed in the cause list. Seeing as writ appeal is of

the year 2014, we see no need to keep this appeal pending any further

and dispose the matter by way of this order.

2. The challenge by the appellant, St.Little Flower Matric

Higher Secondary School, is to demand notices calling upon it to remit

property tax in terms of the provisions of the Coimbatore City

Municipality Corporation Act, 1981 applicable to Tiruchirappalli as well,

from the year 2010 onwards (in short 'Act').

2/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.(MD)No.1136 of 2014

3. The impugned demand notice relates to the period 2011-12

and 2012-13 and the basis of the challenge was that the appellant /

petitioner, which is a Matriculation School, wholly self financed, would

be entitled to an exemption that is provided for under the Act.

4. The learned Judge, by order dated 30.07.2014 has infact

accepted the contention of the appellant to the effect that the demand

could not be sustained in the absence of any prior assessment. The

learned Judge has also rendered a finding to the effect that no notices

were issued to the appellant / petitioner prior to rising of the impugned

final demand.

5. The stand of the Municipality before the Writ Court was

that the School being wholly self financed, was not entitled for full

exemption.

3/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.(MD)No.1136 of 2014

6. Thus, in conclusion, the appellant / petitioner was directed

to remit a sum of Rs.25,000/- as against a demand of Rs.1,25,532/- and

the Corporation was directed to initiate proceedings of assessment by

issuance of a notice of provisional assessment setting out basis on which

annual rental value was computed. The Corporation was directed to

consider the objections filed and pass an order of assessment. It is as

against these directions that the School has filed the present appeal.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant would reiterate the

contention made before the Writ Court to the effect that it is indeed

entitled to the exemption and thus, there was no merit or justification in

the directions of the Writ Court to the effect that its building should be

inspected and final assessment made.

8. Our attention is drawn to the provision of Section 126 (c) of

the Act onwards that grant of exemption in the following terms:

“S. 126. General exemptions.- The following

buildings and land shall be exempt from the

property tax-

..........

4/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.(MD)No.1136 of 2014

(c) buildings used for educational purpose

including hostels attached thereto and places used

for the charitable purpose of sheltering the

destitute or anima