THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
WRIT APPEAL No.306 of 2023
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. K.Ramakrishna, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr. Praveen Kumar Veerjala, learned
Standing Counsel, Greater Hyderabad Municipal
Corporation (GHMC) for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
2. This intra-court appeal is directed against the interim order dated 27.02.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.5525 of 2023.
3. Appellant claims to be the owner of the open land bearing No.17-2-581/A/3 wherein a vegetable market is functioning. Alleging that the landlord had not paid the due municipal taxes till the year ending 2022-23, notices under Section 276 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal 2 HCJ & NTRJ W.A.No.306 of 2023 Corporation Act, 1955 have been issued to the tenants on 10.02.2023.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in respect of municipal taxes for the said land, appellant has already filed a writ petition before this Court being Writ Petition No.16876 of 2022 wherein demand notice issued by the GHMC has been impugned. In the aforesaid case which is pending, an interim order was passed on 01.04.2022 to the effect that respondent authorities i.e., GHMC shall not take any coercive steps against the appellant. He submits that the appellant is willing to pay the legitimate taxes, but for that reason demand notices ought not to have been issued to the occupiers.
5. Learned Single Judge vide the order dated 27.02.2023 granted stay of the impugned notices subject to appellant depositing 50% of the demanded amount within eight weeks, thereafter fixing the matter for further consideration on 10.04.2023.
3 HCJ & NTRJ
W.A.No.306 of 2023
6. We are unable to accept the contention
advanced by learned counsel for the appellant for
entertaining the writ appeal.
7. Admittedly, appellant has not paid the due municipal taxes. Insofar Writ Petition No.16876 of 2022 is concerned, there is no stay on the demand raised. All that learned Single Judge has said is that no coercive action should be taken against the appellant. That order was also upto 07.04.2022. There is nothing on record to show that it has been extended beyond 07.04.2022. In any view of the matter, learned Single Judge has exercised his discretion and granted stay subject to deposit of 50% of the demanded amount within eight weeks.
8. The aforesaid order being an interlocutory one with further hearing fixed on 10.04.2023, we are not inclined to entertain the writ appeal.
9. Further, the occupiers have not expressed any grievance before us.
4 HCJ & NTRJ
W.A.No.306 of 2023
10. Writ Appeal is therefore without any merit and is accordingly dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
11. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.
_______________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ _______________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 13.03.2023 KL