IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

RESERVED ON : 27.11.2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 18.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

Crl.A.No.902 of 2012

Executive Officer,

Slangapalayam Town Panchayat,

Bhavani Main Road,

Erode District – 638 455. ... Appellant

Vs.

G.K.Palanisamy ... Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378(4) of Criminal Procedure Code, to allow the appeal and to set aside the order acquitting the respondent passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani in

S.T.C.No.630 of 2009 dated 28.07.2010 and convict the respondent.

For Appellant : Mr.Haja Naziruddin,

Additional Advocate General for

Mr.C.Selvaraj

For Respondent : Mr.S.Bharanidharan

JUDGMENT The appellant, Executive Officer of Salangapalayam Town Panchayat, Erode District filed a complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani (trial Court) in S.T.C.No.630 of 2009 against the respondent viz., Correspondent of T.N.K Matriculation School, Muthukoundanputhur, Erode District for violation of Tamil Nadu District Municipalities (Amendment) Act, 1994 (TN Act 25 of 1994) [Rule 36(1) in Schedule-IV]. The trial Court by judgment dated 28.07.2010 dismissed the complaint acquitting the respondent, against which, the present Criminal Appeal is filed.

2.Learned Additional Advocate General for the appellant submitted that the trial Court failed to note that the respondent's Educational Institution is neither approved by the appellant Panchayat Council nor functions purely on philanthropic lines rather it is a commercial institution driven by financial interest, hence, the respondent not exempted from property tax. The trial Court failed to note that several notices prior to distraint warrant issued to the respondent, but the respondent never approached the appellant seeking time for payment of property tax nor challenged demand notice and distraint warrant. The appellant followed the procedures as per Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 and filed a complaint, examined witnesses PW1 & PW2 and marked exhibits Exs.P1 to P4. The trial Court found three days time granted to the respondent to pay the property tax is not proper, further levying the property tax every half-year is not as per procedure, the assessee can pay the property tax within 30 days from the date of commencement of the next half-year. In this case, the respondent failed to pay the property tax within 30 days period, hence notice issued giving three days time which is not required and it was only an additional opportunity and hence, it cannot be faulted with.

3.He further submitted the trial Court failed to consider that the Government in G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 23.06.2008 enhanced the property tax with respect to different sectors and for commercial establishment property, tax can be enhanced up to 150%. The respondent collected fees and never functioned the institution on philanthropic lines. Though the appellant could have fixed 150% following the said GO, but only enhanced 75% only taking into consideration the attendant circumstances. The respondent is not exempted from property tax and the respondent's plea that the school run by a Trust and they fall under the purview of philanthropic lines, is not proper.

The trial Court without considering these aspects and on a wrong appreciation, dismissed the complaint. To prove the case, the appellant examined two witnesses viz., PW1, Secretary of Salangapalayam Town Panchayat and PW2, the Junior Assistant of said Town Panchayat and marked four documents viz., Ex.P1/show cause notice, Ex.P2/photocopy of distraint warrant, Ex.P3/office copy of distraint warrant and Ex.P4/despatch register. PW1 in his evidence deposed that he demanded property tax for the year 2008-09 a sum of Rs.48,838/-, the respondent not paid property tax, hence show cause notice dated 17.03.2009 issued, despite service of notice, the property tax not paid, finally on 23.03.2009 distraint warrant issued. PW2, Junior Assistant in his evidence confirms that distra