High Court · 2025

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or directions more particularly a Writ in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly the 2nd Respondent in issuing Notice dated 03'06'2025 vide Rc'No.A1112312025' 26calling upon the Petitioners to furnish property documents' building permission' approved plan etc., within (3) three days and arbitrarily stating that the property taxassessedatRs1,74,448l-forthePremisesbearingDoor'No-6-2-1441' admeasuring 2387 sq yards and having 30000 Sft of Plinth area' situated at Ramagiri, Nalgonda Town, Municipality and District is 'under assessed' and i I i I I I 1 i I thereafter issuing notice dated 11-06.2025 vide Rc.No.A1l.123l 2025-26 threatening to take further action against the petitioners without considering the repry given by the petitioners on 05.06.2025 is contrary to the principres of naturar justice' arbitrary' i'egar and viorative of Articres 14, 19 (1) (g) and 226 0f the constitution of rndia and consequentry set aside the show cause Notice dated 03.06.2025 vide Rc.No.A1 .::: 11 06 2025 v de Rc No ;1:i:zi:,::';,,T":"3":: :iT:#:}",ff l44lsituated at Ramagiri' Nalgonda Town, Municiparity and District. l.A.NO :1 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 151 CpC the affidavit filed in support of the writ direct the Respondents not to take a Premises No, 6_2_.1441, situate District, as .lacking permissron c dated 05.06.2025. praying that in the circumstances stated in petition, the High Court may be pleased to ny coercive steps, including enlisting the Municipality and under the Notices d Ramagiri, Nalgonda Town, ertificates' and as threatened Counsel for the petitioners : SRI VIJAY B.PAROPAKARI 3:x!"ff.illl,"rRespondent No.1 : Gp FoR McpL ADMN AND URBAN Counsel forthe Respondent No.2: SRI pUTTA KRISHNA REDDY The Court made the following ORDER HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B' VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETTTTON No.16701 oE 2025 ORDER (oRAL) This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking the fotlowing relief: "rf," -.u*t" "...to issue a Writ Order or directions more particularly a Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the i" iltp"rA".rt- -.* particutartv the 2nd Respondent in issuing il*i* J""a $.06.202s viie Rc'No'Al l12312025-26calting ,,""" it. Petitioners to furnish property documents' .building ,i.*'ttir,'.rp."".4 pran etc" within (3) three days and ffiii''-r, #i"e ,t.i the propertv J* ^.t:tt"9.at Rs i',ii.ooi', ;;; fi. Premises'bearing Door' No' 6-2-t441' ;il;;;;.*c 2387 sq' vards and having 30000 S.ft' of Plinth ;;;, H;& " namaiiri, Natgonda lowl \tunici-lalitv iii*r"li. :uaer assesied" anJthereafter issuing notice dated ti"iiiizs vide Rc.No.Al 1123t2025-26 threatening to take ,"tio. against the petitioners without considering the nr.tt ". renlv given bv the petirioners on 05'06'2025 is contrary to the *'rt].,ii.t'" i'""*tir :"t,i*, arbitrary' illeeal and violative of ili"il-i+, rs (1) (gi and zzo ortn" constitution of India and 'Lio" the show cause Notice dated ;;;';;;.tly ,"i oi.iiilois vide Rc.No.Artt23t202s-26 followed bv the i*rt""JN"rice dated ll'06'2025 vide Rc'No'Al 112312025- ii'i-ri-...p"" of Premises No' 62l44lsituated at Ramagiri' N"fg.J"T"*", Municipality and District and pass"'"

2. Heard Mr. Vrjay B' Paropakari' leamed counsel for the petitioners; Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, leamed Standing Counsel for respondent No'2 Municipality; and perused the material on record'

3. The record discloses that the petitioners had paid property tax for the demand year 2025-26-l and 2025-26-2 in respect of the subject 2 premises bearing Door No.6_2_1441, admeasuing 23g7 square yards, situated at Ramagiri, Nalgonda Town and District. Ex.p_3 (property tax payment details) indicates the total property tax for the demand year 2025-26 (first half and second half) i.e. Rs.t,33,520l_ (Rupees one lakh thirty three thousand five hundred and twenty only) in respect of the subject properry has been paid by the petitioners on 05.06.20 25 and receipt has been issued to them in that regard. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite payment of the entire property tax of Rs.1,33,520l- on 05.06.2.025, respondenr No.2 issued the impugned demand notice dated 11.06.2025 which is arbitrary and unjust.

4. Leamed Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 Municipality, basing on the written instructions, submitted that as per onrine records, the subject premises of the petitioners was used as hotels/restaurants/ shops for a period from 200g to 2025 but in reality, there is a hospitar being run in the subject premises. The unit rate of rax assessment is different for hotels and hospitals, and the petitioners have misguided the municipal authorities and got the property tax fixed as hotels/shops. Thus, the demand notice dated 1r.06.2025 was issued. That earrier, notice dated 03.05.2025 was issued directing the petitioners to submit 3 relevant documents within a period of three (3) days' The petitioners submitted application dated 05'06'2025 stating that three (3) days of time is not sufficient and they attached the buitding permission to the application. However, the said building permission is not suffrcient and what is rerevant is usage of the properry and the petitioners did not give any reply in that regard' Thus' notice dated 11'06'2025 was issued directing the petitioners to submit the relevant documents within a period of seven (7) days' It is further stated that the petitioners have paid advance property tax upto 2031 in respect ofthe property for which door number is not available in the online records' by misguiding the municipal authorities' \

5. As it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the entire tax for the deman d year 2025-26 was paid which is evident from the receipt dated 05'06'2025 (Ex'P-3) and there are no tax a:rears' and considering that there is dispute with regard to the usage ofthe property' in the opinion of this Court, if the tax was to be revised' detailed enquiry I I is required. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 6. petitioners to submit detailed reply to the notice dated 1l'06'2025 within 4 --; a period of five (5) days from the date ofreceipt ofa copy ofthis order. Thereafter, enquiry shall be conducted by respondent No.2 by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks thereafter. Until such exercise is done, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners in respect of the subject premises bearing No.6-2- 1441, situated at Ramagiri, Nalgonda Town and District. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition stand closed. /TTRUE COPY// ,',Bfi-T'#Hsffi SECTION OFFICER nd Urban DeveloPment' a District Nalgond RBAN DEVELOPM ENT, High To

2. a ana at The PrinciPal Secretary, MuniciPal Administratio Hvderabad f Telang Sec retariat. State o ality, Nalgond DU missioner' The Com R MCPL ouTl to GP FO erabad. I Two CCs f e State o t , Advocate Court for th DY, Advocate (oPUC) SRI VIJAY One CC to SRI PUTTA One CC to t) . Two CD CoPtes u a Municlp ADMN AN a at HYd PAKARI A RED Telangan B.PARO oPucl KRISHN 4 SA TK

1.'- .:,..it: r'., tai Iri I i J 1 ii. l, r,,,,= (r -Y (.j 2 3 nuL 'tzt (' ,I _':- i I r,l * -cS r... r, HIGH COURT DATED:18 t}6t2}2s ORDER WP.No.16701 of 2O2S DISPOSING OF THE W.P WTHOUT COSTS. 9