Sri Prem Nagar Ashram vs Chief Judicial Magistrate and Another

B.S. Verma, J.—By means of this petition the Petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari for commanding the Respondents to quash the imposition of water tax and house tax at the annual rental value of Rs. 60,000/- vide Annexure-11 and to exempt house tax as per provisions of House Tax Bye-laws. Further prayer is also made to quash the judgments passed by Respondent No. 1, contained in annexure Nos. 13 and 14.

Brief facts of the case giving rise to the instant writ petition are that the Petitioner is a society registered under Society Registration Act. The Society has also been recognized by Director of Income Tax Exemption u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Society has its own property within the area of Jwalapur in territorial jurisdiction of Nagar Palika Parishad, Haridwar. The Respondent No. 2 vide order of water tax committee dated 11-9-1989 decided the objections of the Petitioner and determined the annual rental value at Rs. 16,000/- for the purpose of imposing water tax. The committee of Respondent No. 2 was also pleased to exempt house tax being the property of the Petitioner as religious property. Since 1st April 1994 to 31.3.1998, the annual rental value of the property of the Petitioner''s society was fixed at Rs. 32,000/- while house tax was exempted. But the Respondent No. 2 without adopting the procedure enhanced the annual rental value from Rs. 32,000/- to Rs. 60,000/- without any rhyme or reason. The competent authority has not passed any order regarding enhancement of annual rental value for the purpose of water tax. Thereafter a demand bill of house tax and water tax was received by the Petitioner showing the recovery at the annual rental value of Rs. 60,000/- for both house tax and water tax. Feeling aggrieved by the demand notice the Petitioner preferred appeal before C.J.M. Haridwar which was numbered as Nagar Palika Appeal No. 31 of 1999, but the appeal was dismissed by C.J.M. Haridwar vide his order dated 21-6-2001. Thereafter the Petitioner filed review petition No. 239 of 2001 before the C.J.M. Haridwar, but the same was not entertained on the grounds of limitation as it was filed with 15 days delay. The application for condonation of delay was dismissed vide order dated 3.12.2001. Hence the writ petition has been filed.

The Respondent No. 2 Nagar Palika Parishad, Haridwar filed counter affidavit and alleged that the Nagar Palika Parishad has adopted the due procedure for imposing the enhanced tax by enhancing the annual rental value of the property from Rs. 32,000/- to Rs. 60,000/- on the basis of assessment list. The Respondent No. 2 has followed the due procedure prescribed for enhancement of annual rental value and imposition of tax as provided under the provisions of Section 140 to 146 of U.P. Municipalities Act and the byelaws made thereunder.

The Petitioner filed rejoinder affidavit and alleged that the Respondent No. 2 did not follow the procedure laid down in the provisions of Sections 140 to 146 of U.P. Municipalities Act. No reasonable opportunity of hearing was ever given to the Petitioner''s society before enhancing the tax.

I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the Nagar Palika Parishad Haridwar has enhanced the annual rental value of the property of the Petitioner without giving opportunity of hearing. He further alleged that the Petitioner''s society is a religious entity and is exempted from house tax. Therefore, the imposition of house tax as well as water tax is against law and liable to be set aside.

I do not find any substance in the above submission of learned Counsel for the Petitioner, firstly on the ground that the Petitioner was given notice by Nagar Palika Parishad before enhancing the annual rental of the property. The C.J.M. in his judgment dated 21.6.2009 has specifically recorded a finding that the Petitioner in para-5 of memo of appeal has admitted this fact that notice was issued to the society in respect of enhanced tax. Secondly it is mentioned that the Petitioner''s society was imposed house tax and water tax earlier also and the Petitioner was depositing the same with the Nagar Palika Parishad and the property was not exempted from the liability of house tax and water tax. It is also to be stated here that the Petitioner'' property cannot be exempted from the liability of tax simply on the ground of its being a religious entity. Annexure No. 9 to the writ petition is assessment sheet. Perusal of this assessment sheet shows that details of rooms and property owned by the Petitioner''s society has been mentioned in it and after assessing its value annual rental value was assessed. It cannot be said that the Respondent has not adopted the procedure before enhancing the tax. I do not find any illegality and impropriety in the imposition of tax by Respondent No. 2 as well as in the impugned judgment and order passed by learned C.J.M. Haridwar.

For the discussion made above the petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.

The writ petition is dismissed.