Vinod Krishna Kaul vs Lt. Governor NCT of Delhi

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2012 Supreme(Del) 2873

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, VEENA BIRBAL
Vinod Krishna Kaul – Appellant
Versus
Lt. Governor NCT of Delhi – Respondent

For the Petitioner in WP(C) No. 8030/2003:Mr. Dipak Bhattacharya, Advocate.
For the Petitioners in WP(C) Nos. 10617/2005,8723/2008:Mr. B.B. Jain , Mr Sushil Jaswal, Advocates.
For the Petitioners in WP(C) Nos. 7688/2008, 7691/2008, 9812/2009, 9822/2009, 9827/ 2009, 9838/2009, 10272/2009, 11014/2009, 11015/2009, 11016/2009, 11017/2009, 11018/2009,11019/2009, 11020/2009, 11021/2009, 11294/2009,11290/2009,11586/ 2009,11590/2009:Mr S.K. Jain, Advocate.
For the Petitioner in WP(C) 9750/2009:Mr B.S. Maan , Mr Jai Prakkash, Advocates.
For the Petitioner in WP(C) Nos.17454-55/2004:Mr. Mukesh, Ms. Bhanita , Ms. Neera, Advocates.
For the Petitioner in WP (C) 9341/2009:Mr. Sumer Kumar Sethi, Advocate.
For the Respondent/MCD:Ms. Amita Gupta, Mrs. P.L. Gautam , Ms. Anshum Jain for Ms. Suparana Srivastava, Advocates.
For the MCD in W.P.(C) 8030/2003 :Ms. Maninder Acharya, Advocate.
For the Respondent/GTNCTD:Ms.Zubeda Begum, Ms. Bandana Shukla, Mr. Khaleel Khan for Ms. Sujata Kashyap, Mr. Hem Kumar for Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal , Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, Advocates.
For the Respondent/UOI:Ms. Meera Bhatia, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.

1. In all these petitions (26 in number), there is a challenge to the unit area method of levying property taxes in Delhi introduced by virtue of the Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2003. It is prayed that the Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2003 and the Delhi Municipal Corporation (Property Tax) Bye-laws, 2004 be declared as unconstitutional and as being void ab initio. The challenge, which is common to all the petitions, is founded on the following pleas: (I) The Legislative Assembly for the National Capital Territory lacked the legislative competence to enact the Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2003; (II) The Presidential Assent in the manner stipulated in Article 239AA(3)(c) was not there; (III) the unit area method is not a recognised system of valuation; (IV) There are no guidelines for the exercise of power under the new Section 116A and for classification; and (V) A flat rate of taxation under the unit area method is arbitrary and discriminatory and is, therefore, illegal. Apart from these pleas,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2012 Supreme(Del) 2873

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, VEENA BIRBALVinod Krishna Kaul – AppellantVersusLt. Governor NCT of Delhi – Respondent

Cases Referred (6)

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, VEENA BIRBAL
Vinod Krishna Kaul – Appellant
Versus
Lt. Governor NCT of Delhi – Respondent