Sachin Upadhyay v. 1. The State of Telangana

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 any writ order or direction more in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the online demand notice dt.29.03.2025 demanding petitioner to pay Rs. 3,08,596/- for the current demand, Rs.B,96,B34i- in arrears, and Rs. 5,'16,310/- in interest, totaling Rs. 17,21 ,7401- for premises bearing House No.8-3-980/B (PT1N.No.1100831544), situated at Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad, T.S as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to G.H.M.0 Act,1955 and consequently set-aside the same and direct the respondent no.3 and his subordinates not to seize the Petitioner's property bearing House No. 8-3- 980i8 (PT|N.No.1100831544), situated at Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad, T.S, pursuant to the impugned online demand notice d1.29.03.2025. I I I I I I I I I i I i I I i I k lA NO: 'f OF 2025 '/ 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 direct the respondent no.3 and his subordinates not to seize petitioner's property bearing House No 8-3-980/8 (PT|N.No.1100831544), situated at Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad. T.S, pursuant to the impugned online demand notice dl.2g.O3.2025, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PRAMOD SINGH Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN & URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI MIDDE ARUN KUMAR, SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORDER / :-t HONOURABLE SRIIUSTICE B. VIIAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24645oF 202s ORDER: (oRAL) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief: '...to issue any writ order or direction more in the nature of y.it^ 9f Mandamus declaring the online A"r-j" oo,i.. ,^9ll rtemanding p"ti-tior", . 0", *.ll]or,rsor_ fi-rr;ll r"r Lrc current demand. Rs. 9,96,g34/- in arrears, and Rs.5. I6.3 I0^ in inreresr. roraling Rs. fi.il.1q'0t_-ioiJr"ri... bearing House No.8-3_e80/B tpi^].N". il bd#i ri?,.rln**o s.iil.gT colony, Hyderabad, rs ., ii[e"i''*u,..uo, unconstitutional and contrary to G.H.M.C ait,' rGs una consequently set_aside the si and h 1,, 6";; i;;; ;;; 1L :?:i ft'T jff #'j,T i'[::; bearing House No. 8_3_e8_0/ts frirN- r.i".iiotdj,rool, :]ll","d ar Srinagar Colony, Hytlerabad, f.S, pr..r"rit, tt. rmpugned online demand notice dt.29.03.202i-.'; " ' 11-

2. Heard Mr. pramod Singh, leamed counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Midde Arun Kumar, Ieamed Standing Counsel for GHMC, appearing for respondents No.2 and 3; and perused the material on record o.

3. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the premises bearing H.No.8-3-980/B which consists of ground + 2 upper floors as well as pent house. The subject property has the built up area of approximately 2000 square feet admeasu ring g2 square yards, located at Srinagar colony' Hyderabad- [t is stated that the petitioner acquired the subject property under a registered partition deed bearing document No.4500 of \ 2 r1 2022 dated,2l.1.l.2}22 and the same was assessed by the respondent authorities with H.No.8-3-980/B' The petitioner had been paying the prope(y tax regularly. It is stated that initially the propefty tax was assessed at Rs.28,386/- (Rupees twenty eight thousand three hundred and eighty six only) for 2015- 16 and the petitioner paid the property tax at the same rate until2022. The officers of the GI{MC never visited the subject property nor inipected the site That in the rnonth of March 2025' the subordinates of respondent No'2 issued demand notice dated 29 '03 '2025 directing the petitioner to pay property tax at Rs'8'96'834i- towards arrears, Rs.5,16,310/- towards interest, Rs'3'08'5961 towards current due, in total Rs.12,94,093/- (Rupees twelve lakhs ninety four thousand and ninety three only). Learned counsel further submitted that the plinttr area of the subject property was incorrectly shown as 3675 square feet in the impugned demand notice instead of 2000 square feet' There is violation of procedure under Sections 220 to 223 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipat Corporation Act, 1955 (for short 'Act') Section 220 ofthe Act mandates the GHMC authorities to issue prior notice to the properly owner for assessing/revising the annual propefty tax' Thus' the demand notice dated 29.03.2025 is issued in violation of principles of natural justice and in violation of Section 220 of the Act' t-" {.: J

4. Leamed Standing Counsel for GHMC submitted that the petitioner has alternative remedy under Section 2g2 of the Act by way of appeal before the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Hyderabad. The petitioner has not paid the property tax for several years, as suciS the demand notice d,ated 2.9.03.2025 has been issued directing him to pay the arrears of the property tax and interest on such arrears. l. 5' In the light of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that tfre property tax was initially assessed at Rs.2g,3g6l_ and the same has been enhanced arbitrarily without any notice to the petitioner allegedly in vioration of Section 220 of the Act and that the plinth area of the subject property was wrongly shown as 3675 square feet instead of2000 square feet, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit a representation to respondent No.3 for assessment/ revision of the properly tax in respect of the subject property within a period of one (l) week from today by depositing an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only). The representation, so filed by the petitioner, shall be disposed ofrespondent No.3 by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law. The amount of Rs'2'00,000/- deposited by.the petitioner shall be adjusted to the property 4 tax that is assessed or revised by respondent No.3 pursuant to the representation. Until then, status quo, obtairring as on today shall be maintained in respect of the subject propefiy' There shall be no order as to costs As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications' if any' pending in this writ petition stand closed D SD'. A.PRATHIMA REGISTRAR qPUTY \ /,TRUE COPY" ECTION OFFTCER To

1. The Pri nciPal Secretary' Municlp al Administration and Urban DeveloPment' I CorPoration, Tankbund' Greater HYderabad MuniciPal T.S, State Greater HYder of Telangana abad MuniciPa derabad, riat, HY 2 Secreta The Com Hyd DePutY CorP CC One 4 5 Two CC missioner, d. Comm ation, HYd to SRI P stoGPF ana, at H of Telang One CC to Two CD CoPies issioner, Khairatabad, Circle-17' erabad. RAMOD OR MCP yderaba SINGH, L ADMN & URBAN d.tourl SRI MI DD E ARUN Advocate IoPucl DEV, High Court for the State KUMAR, SC FOR GHMC iOPUCI t) 7 PSK PSK HIGH COURT DATED:2010812025 CC TODAY ORDER WP.No.24645 of 2025 t * EC Tll 2 1 AU6 2025 trATC .c) ^ * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS