Advocate's office does not qualify as commercial use for property tax tariff; requires re-assessment based on current occupancy.

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct the respondent to change the assessment in respect of the petitioner's property from commercial to domestic tariff by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 21.07.2025.

2.It is the case of the petitioner that, originally, a portion of the property was let out to a tenant for commercial purposes and therefore, the assessment was classified as commercial. Subsequently, the tenant vacated the premises and the said portion is now occupied by the petitioner's son for his purpose of establishing an advocate's office. According to the petitioner, the use of the premises as an advocate's office cannot be termed as commercial and hence, the petitioner has made a representation to change of tariff from commercial to domestic.

3.A useful reference in this regard can be made to the Judgment of this Court in K.Kanagasabai Vs. the Superintending Engineer and another (W.P.No.21731 of 2003).

4.When the matter came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel, taking notice on behalf the respondent Corporation, would submit that the authorities will take up the representation of the petitioner for consideration and after due inspection and affording an opportunity to the petitioner, they will pass final orders in the manner known to law. 5.In view thereof, this Writ Petition is disposed of on the following terms:-

i. The petitioner's representation dated 21.07.2025 shall be taken up for consideration and after making due inspection and affording an opportunity to the petitioner, appropriate orders in accordance with law regarding the change in the nature of assessment shall be passed in respect of the petitioner's property.

ii. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the web copy of the order.