HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9978 OF 2025

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of respondent No.3, in issuing demand notice dated 20.02.2025 directing the petitioner to pay Rs.1,05,69,504/- and not considering the explanation of the petitioner dated 03.07.2023 and 22.02.2025, as arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution, and consequently, to direct the respondents to reassess the property tax of the petitioner’s premises bearing No.5-1-485 to 487 situated at Jam Bagh, Hyderabad.

2.1. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the property bearing Municipal No.5-1-485 to 487, admeasuring 346.93 sq. yards, situated at Jambagh, Hyderabad. The building was constructed more than 40 years back. Property tax was assessed at Rs.1,33,094/- during the year 2007 when the property was in occupation of tenant by name M/s. Osmania Medical Book Depot.

2.2. It is submitted that as per clause 21 of the lease agreement between the petitioner and his tenant, the property tax was to be paid by the tenant. However, the tenant defaulted in payment of rent and property tax. The petitioner got evicted the tenant in the year 2023.

2.3. It is submitted that in the year 2010, out of total extent of 346.93 sq. yards of the petitioner’s property, an extent of 107.93 sq. yards was acquired for road widening, and during acquisition, a portion of the petitioner’s building including the stair case was demolished, as a result the first floor of the building became inaccessible and the petitioner is not using his first floor. While so, the petitioner submitted representation dated 03.07.2023 to respondent No.3 intimating about acquisition of 107.93 sq. yards and eviction of tenant and requested for reassessing the property tax. Subsequently, on receipt of demand notice dated 20.02.2025, the petitioner submitted representation dated 22.02.2025 to respondent No.3 for reassessment of property.

3. Heard Mr. Nabi Rasool Baladur, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned demand notice shows total property tax payable by the petitioner as Rs.1,05,69,504/- representing arrears of tax component being Rs.27,37,801/- and interest on arrears component being Rs.76,68,819/-.

5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 placed on record a copy of the assessment history of the petitioner’s property and it is submitted that the petitioner is liable to pay arrears of tax from 2008-2009 and total amount payable by the petitioner was quantified at Rs.1,08,10,783/- and the impugned demand notice was issued.

6. On perusal of the assessment history furnished by the petitioner, it appears exorbitant interest is charged by the GHMC. Interest on arrears component (Rs.77,96,969/-) is two times more than the arrears tax component (Rs.28,70,895/-). There is no clarity as to how interest component has been arrived at and the formula being adopted for calculating interest. Further it is the case of the petitioner that arrears of tax for the last more than 15 years are being demanded without any notice to the petitioner, 7. In the light of above observations, the impugned demand notice issued by respondent No.3 is in violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner ought to have been given opportunity to explain his case and representation submitted by the petitioner dated 22.02.2025 should have been considered by respondent No.3.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the explanation of the petitioner dated 03.07.2023 and 22.02.2025 and re-assess the property tax of the petitioner’s premises bearing Municipal No.5-1-485 to 487 situated at Jambagh, Hyderabad, subject to the condition of the petitioner paying an amount of Rs.10,00,000/-, out of which Rs.5,00,000/- shal