E2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 10111 OF 2024
Between:
Acii Andhra Aided Elementary. School, Represented by
its Correspondent
Gudeti Rajendra Prasad, S/o Abraham, Advocate, aged
52 years, R/o D.No.
36-2-4, Wood pet, Vijayawada, NTR District.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal
Secretary, Municipal
Administration and Urban Development Department, A.P.
Secretariat
Buildings, Velagapudi, Thulium Mandalam, Amaravathi,
Guntur District.
2. The Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada, Represented
by its
Commissioner, Vijayawada, NTR District.
3. The Assistant Commissioner, Circle -3 Office, TVR
Municipal Complex,
Patamata, Vijayawada, NTR District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying that in
the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,
the High Court may
be pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction mere
particularly one in the
nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the Integrated
demand bill
bearing No. 1/107301143847 dated 07/04/2023 for the
year of 2023-24 with
Assessment No. 1073105370 issued through WhatsApp on
16-03-2024 by
the 2"'^ respondent to Adi Andhra Aided Elementary
School, Woodpet,
Vijayawada for an amount of R$. 2, 59, 640/- as property
tax to the school
as being illegal arbitrary and violative of Arts 14,
16 and 21 of the
Constitution of India and violating the provisions
of Section 202 of the
Municipal Corporation Act.
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the
circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition;
the High Court may be
pleased to stay all further proceedings in Integrated
demand bill bearing
No. I/107301143847 dated 07/04/2023 for the year of
2023-24 with
Assessment No. 1073105370 issued (through WhatsApp
on 16-03-2024)
by the 2^^^ respondent to Adi Andhra Aided Elementary
School, Woodpet,
Vijayawada for an amount of Rs. 2, 59, 640/- as property
tax to the School.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. BALANTHA DEVADASS
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP MUNICIPAL ADMIN
& URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3: SRI M.MANOHAR
REDDY, SC
FOR MUNC & MUNC CORP
The Court made the following: ORDER
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
APHC010169372024
PRADESH
0HS
[3332]
ATAMARAVATI
T: I
0
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
Wd
TUESDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 10111/2024
Between:
...PETITIONER
Adi Andhra Aided Elementary School
AND
...RESPONDENT(S)
The State Of Ap and Others
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. DEVADASS BALANTHA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP
The Court made the following:
the demand bill bearing No.l/107301143847
Impugning
dated 07.04.2023 for the year of 2023-24 with Assessment
No.l073105370 issued through WhatsApp on 16.03.2024 by the
Adi Andhra Aided Elementary
2"^^ respondent to the petitioner’s
Woodpte, Vijayawada demanding Rs.2,59,640/- as
School,
Adi Andhra Aided Elementary School, Woodpet,
property tax to
Vijayawada is the grievance of the petitioner.
2
2. Hsard Sri Balantha Davadass
learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri M.Manohar Reddy, learned Standing
Counsel
for Municipal Corporation.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration contended
that, the petitioner’s school is an
aided elementary school
recognized by the Government (full grant-in-aid) and
the same is
exempted from payment of property tax in view of the
provisions
of the Municipal Corporation Act 1955. Contrary to
the same,
when the correspondent of the school
received whatsapp
message for payment of property tax, the correspondent
of the
school made a representation on 27.03.2024
seeking exemption
of property tax by virtue of Corporation Act 1955.
Surprisingly,
without passing orders on the said
representation, the impugned
demand notice dated 07.04.2023 demanding Rs;2,59,640/-
was
issued and on the strength of the said notice, the
respondent
corporation may take coercive steps. If the same is
materialized
the petitioner would suffer loss and hardship.
He further submitted that, it would suffice for the
time being
if a direction is given to the respondent corporation
to
pass orders
on the petitioner’s representation dated 27.03.2024
before taking
any steps against the impugned notice.
4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel contended
that, the District Educational Officer has canceled
the extension
of temporary recognition to the petitioner’s school
under
proceedings dated 30.06.2024. In view of the same the
petitioner
cannot claim any exemption and he is liable to pay
property tax
3
as demanded by the corporation in the impugned notice.
Whether
V 1/
the petitioner is entitled to seek exemption or not
it is for the
corporation to decide. However, the corporation will
pass
appropriate orders on the petitioner’s representations
and prayed
to dismiss the writ petition.
5. Perused the record. ;
6. The petitioner is claiming exemption by virtue of
Section
202 Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. The relevant provision
of
the act reads as follows:
Section 202General tax on what premises to be ievied
b(b) Educational institutions up to class, the buildings
of which are donated by charitable institutions
or
philanthropists or which are depending on the grant-in-aid
by the government for the maintenance and such other
educational institutions which are not running purely
on the
commercial lines, but serving the cause of the primary
education which the government may consider from time
to
time.
The impugned demand notice dated 07.04.2023 would
indicate that there are arrears to a tune of Rs.78,422/-
and
interest accrued on that to a tune of Rs.1,56,519/-
totaling net
amount to a tune of Rs.2,41,621/-. Whether the said
arrears falls
before the cancellation of the extension of temporary
recognition
to the petitioner’s school or not and whether the respondent
corporation can demand legally the property tax from
the
petitioner or not has to be adjudicated. The petitioner
has
submitted a representation dated 27.03.2024 to the
Corporation
raising all the grounds and thereby requesting to wave
the tax
4
pertaining to the subject school. It is very surprising
to see that
without considering the petitioner’s representation
a demand
notice dated 07.04.2023 ha? boen served on the petitioner.
However, as the respondent apthprities has an intention
to pass
orders on the petitioner’s representation before taking
any
coercive steps on the impugned notice dated 07.04.2023,
this
court is not inclined to go into the merits and demerits
Of the
case.
7. Taking the submissions of both the learned counsel
and
the provision referred supra ..into consideration,
this Court is
inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing
the following
order:
(i). The respondent corporation is directed to pass
appropriate orders on the petitioner’s representation
dated
27.03.2024 in accordance with law, if required by giving
an
opportunity of being heard, as expeditiously as possible,
at any
rate not later than four (04) weeks from the date of
receipt of a
copy this order and communicate the same to the petitioner,
(ii). Till then the respondent corporation is directed
not to
take any coercive steps against the impugned proceedings
dated 07.04.2023.
(iii). The petitioner shall produce all the relevant
material in
support of his claim before the corporation. If the
petitioner does
not cooperate with the enquiry, the respondent authorities
are not
precluded to take steps in accordance with law.
i
.5
m
4
I
Accordingly, the Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be
8.
no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, interlpcutory applications pending, if
any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed.
SD/-SHAIK WIOHD. „RAaFcli
assistant registrar
//TRUE COPY//
CA^
Action officer
To
1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development
Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Buildings,
Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.
2. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada,
Commissioner, Vijayawada, NTR District.
3. The Assistant Commissioner, Circle -3 Office, TVR Municipal Complex,
Patamata, Vijayawada, NTR District.
4. One CC to Siri. Balantha Devadass, Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Admin & Urban Dev, High Court of
Andhra Pradesh. [OUT
6. One CC to Sri M.Manohar Reddy, SC for MUNC & MUNC CORP.
[OPUC]
7. Three CD Copies.
gi
HIGH COURT
DATED:30/04/2024
ORDER
WP.No.10111 of 2024
I MUL 2024 ^
Current Seci/on .
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION
WITHOUT COSTS