Madras High Court
Thomai Tamil Doss vs The Commissioner on 7 January, 2025
Author: M.S.Ramesh
Bench: M.S.Ramesh
W.A.(MD)No.2682 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 07.01.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
and
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
W.A.(MD)No.2682 of 2024
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.18622 of 2024
Thomai Tamil Doss : Appellant
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Sivagangai Municipality,
Sivagangai,
Sivagangai District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Sivagangai Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
3.The Town Surveyor,
Sivagangai,
Sivagangai District.
4.Veerapathiran : Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent,
praying to set aside the order dated 06.08.2024 made in W.P.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.A.(MD)No.2682 of 2024
(MD)No.19025 of 2024, on the file of this Court and allow this Writ
Appeal.
For Appellants : Mr.A.R.Kannappan
For Respondents : Mr.S.Shaji Bino
Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
**************
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.S.RAMESH, J.]
Challenge is made to the order of the learned Single
Judge dated 06.08.2024 made in W.P.(MD)No.19025 of 2024.
2.The only ground on which the learned Counsel for the
appellant has preferred this appeal is that no notice was given
prior to passing of the impugned order of cancellation of the
property tax assessment. Such a submission seems to be on a
misconception of facts. Admittedly, a notice dated 05.06.2024 was
issued by the respondents to the appellant for the purpose of
conducting a spot inspection, which is for the consequential
proposed action for cancellation of property tax assessment. When
the appellant has challenged this notice dated 05.06.2024 in W.P.
(MD)No.12467 of 2024, the Writ Court had disposed of the writ
petition on 13.06.2024, by observing as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
“2.By the impugned notice dated
05.06.2024, the first respondent proposes to
conduct spot inspection. The object of
conducting such an inspection appears to be to
consider the complaint for cancellation of the
property tax assessment. The impugned notice
by itself does not take away the petitioner's
right. If any adverse order is passed by the first
respondent, it shall be issued to the petitioner
immediately. It shall not be implemented for a
period of three weeks thereafter. I am granting
this breathing time so that the petitioner can
approach the Court and obtain relief in the
meanwhile. I make it clear that I have not gone
into the merits of the matter. All the defences
and contentions of the petitioner are left open.”
3.The order impugned in the aforesaid writ petition itself
evidences that the appellant was aware of the proposed action
taken by the respondents for cancelling the property tax
assessment and as such it cannot be said that the present
impugned order, cancelling the property tax assessment was in
violation of principles of natural justice. Learned Single Judge while
rejecting the claim of the appellant had granted liberty to the
appellant to approach the Civil Court to enforce his rights, if any.
We do not find any infirmity or illegality in such a finding.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4.Accordingly, this Writ Appeal fails and the same is
dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[M.S.R.,J.] & [A.D.M.C.,J.]
07.01.2025
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
MR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Commissioner,
Sivagangai Municipality,
Sivagangai,
Sivagangai District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Sivagangai Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
3.The Town Surveyor,
Sivagangai,
Sivagangai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
MR
JUDGMENT MADE IN
07.01.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
