THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION No.39445 of 2022
O R D E R:
The writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: "... to issue a writ or any other appropriate writ, order or orders direction or directions particularly Writ Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not correcting the online data base of property tax in respect of premises bearing Municipal No.8-2- 696/697-S (PTIN No.1100837788) situated at Banajara Hills, Road No.12, Hyderabad, by considering representations dated 05.10.2021, 21.02.2022 and 18.08.2022 in compliance of Judgment dated 22.06.2021 passed in M.A. No.137 of 2020 as arbitrary, illegal".
2. Mr. Ghanta Rama Rao, learned senior counsel representing Mr. Mohd Islamuddin Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that before 2015, the petitioner has been paying the property tax of Rs.67,184/- per annum in respect of the house bearing No.8-2-696/697-S and when a notice was issued directing him to pay an amount of Rs. 16,93,326/-, he has filed M.A.No.75 of 2015 on the file of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, and the same was allowed by judgement dated 06.10.2015 setting aside the demand notice dated 09.01.2005 issued by the respondent Corporation and directed the petitioner to pay the property tax of three years as claimed in the impugned demand notice at Rs.67,184/- per annum. He submits that the petitioner has paid the arrears and continued to pay the tax as per the judgment passed in 2 LK, J W.P.No.39445 of 2022 M.A.No.75 of 2015. Learned Senior Counsel submits that thereafter, when the respondent Corporation has demanded the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.28,35,495/- he filed M.A.No.138 of 2020 on the file of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, and the same was allowed by judgment dated 22-06-2021 setting aside the demand notice dated 03-09-2020. He submits even after that the respondent Corporation is not correcting the online data base of property tax in respect of the premises of the petitioner. He submits that in spite of the judgments passed in M.A.Nos.75 of 2015 and 138 of 2020, the respondent Corporation has not rectified the said mistakes and even though the petitioner has complied with the directions in the said judgments, no steps are taken by the respondents to correct the data thereafter and still they are showing in the website that the petitioner has to pay arrears and hence, the petitioner has come up before this Court.
3. Mr. K. Siddhardh Rao, learned standing counsel for the respondent Corporation, submits that the respondent Corporation will consider the representation of the petitioner dated 18.08.2022 in the light of the judgement passed in M.A.No.138 of 2020.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner 3 LK, J W.P.No.39445 of 2022 dated 18.08.2022 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No order as to costs.
5. Miscellaneous Applications, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.
___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 27th October, 2022 sj