M.C.D. vs Pitambar Publishing Co. (P) Ltd.
2004 Latest Caselaw 184 Del

JUDGMENT

J.D. Kapoor, J.

1. Vide impugned order dated 10.3.1998 passed by learned Additional District Judge, the Assessment Order dated 28.2.1985 was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Authority for deciding it afresh for taking into consideration the plea of the respondent for concession in the rebate on account of lack of civic facilities in the area or the locality in question. The objection to this observation of the learned ADJ is that the Assessing Authority is not required to take into consideration the revision or lack of provision of the civic amenities even if the petitioner-MCD is obligated to provide while fixing the rate able value for the purpose of house-tax.

2. The Division Bench of this Court has taken a view in Panchshila Co-operative House Building Society Ltd and another Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and another- that the levy of property tax by the Corporation under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 is not dependent upon the taking over of the services or providing of civic amenities mentioned in the various clauses of Section 42 of the Act. These observations were made in respect of the property situated in a locality developed by the colonizer. It was held that the colonizer was under obligation to develop the land fully and lay the services in accordance with the lay out plan because the lay out was approved and sanctioned on that condition and, therefore, colonizer was bound by the conditions on which the lay out plan was sanctioned and similarly the corporation was under the obligation to take over and maintain the services by reasons of the mandatory provisions in Section 42 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation .Act but the statutory obligation arises only if the requirement in the relevant clause or clauses of Section 42 are satisfied.

3. Another case relied upon by the counsel for the respondent is also of this Court and is reported as Man Mohan Tuli Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and another-AIR 1983 Delhi 152 wherein view was taken that the property tax can be levied by the Municipal Corporation only on the fulfilllment of its mandatory and discretionary function under the Act, which are to provide civic amenities such as supplying drinking water, scavenging, supply of electricity, etc., and, therefore, for the purpose of property ax the nexus is functional and not physical or merely territorial.

4. It is apparent both these cases relate to those properties which have been duly authorised by the concerned authorities and where the civic amenities have been either taken over by the MCD or have been provided by the MCD itself. So far as the case in hand is concerned, the property is situated in Lal Dora that is, the rural area, which has been subsequently urbanized and no kind of any facility either in the form of road, electricity supply, water supply, etc. has been provided by the MCD.

5. The lack of provision of civic facilities is a factor to be taken into consideration only in respect of those localities where such facilities have been provided or taken over by the MCD. Where no such facilities have been provided or taken over and merely because the area has been urbanized does not entitle the MCD to fix the rate able value on the same pattern as is applicable in respect of those localities or areas where such facilities have been provided by the MCD though are not being looked after o maintained fully. Thus, the instant case is clearly distinguishable from the aforesaid cited cases and has to be considered in the light of its own facts and, therefore, Assessing Authority has to take into consideration the fact that civic facilities have not been provided at all and, therefore, the criteria applicable for the purpose of property tax will have to be different than the criteria applicable in those localities where such civic facilities have been provided.

6. Next objection to the impugned order is with regard to the non-application of CPWD plinth area rates. Learned First Appellate Court has though observed that the fitness of CPWD plinth area rates should be seen from an angle that in which area these rates apply but has left this aspect of the matter to be decided by the Assessing Authority after hearing the respondent in this regard. In view of this, there is no need for interference with regard to the applicability of CPWD plinth area rates as the respondent has been provided a reasonable opportunity of being heard by raising all possible objections in this regard.

7. In view of the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in the petition and dismiss the same. The Assessing Authority shall re-decide the matter by keeping the observations made in this order by this Court. The party shall appear before the Assessing Authority on 8th March, 2004 for the aforesaid purpose at 4:30 p.m.