Shobha Gupta vs The State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 5302 Tel

       THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

                 WRIT PETITION No.39415 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.8-2-681/A/5/1 (GF) (PTIN No. 1100842251) 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.136 of 2020 as arbitrary illegal and ....".

2. Mr. Ghanta Rama Rao, learned senior counsel representing

Mr. Mohd Islamuddin Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner is resident of house bearing No.8-2-

681/A/5/1(GF) admeasuring 616sq.yards having plinth area of

1800sq.ft. It is stated that when the respondents have raised a

demand of property tax arrears at Rs.45,56,002/- up to the year

2019-20, the petitioner has filed M.A.No.136 of 2020 on the file of

the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court at Hyderabad and vide

judgement dated 22.06.2021, the appeal is allowed and the

impugned notice dated 03.09.2020 was set aside by the court.

3. Learned senior counsel further submits that though the

petitioner earlier has been paying the property tax at Rs.63,382/-

per annum, the same was enhanced to Rs.1,10,224/- per annum.

He submits that the petitioner has filed M.A.No.58 of 2011 as the

respondent corporation has abruptly revised the property tax and

after passing of the judgement therein, the respondent corporation

has reassessed the property tax at Rs.63,382/- per annum. He

submits that though the petitioner has cleared the entire

amounts, as per the data available in the website, the arrears to

be paid by the petitioner shown as Rs.45,56,002/- and on that,

the petitioner has filed M.A.No.136 of 2020 and by order dated

22.06.2021, the said appeal is allowed setting aside the demand

notice dated 03.09.2020.

4. Learned senior counsel further submits that though the

petitioner has cleared the arrears, the respondents are

continuously showing the said amounts as arrears without

updating the amounts as per the judgement passed by the court

below in M.A.No.136 of 2020. He submits that several

representations are given to the respondents and in spite of the

same, no action has been taken to update the details in the

website.

5. Mr. K. Siddhardh Rao, learned standing counsel for the

respondent municipality submits that they will consider the

representation of the petitioner dated 18.08.2022 in the light of

the judgement passed by the in M.A.No.136 of 2020.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the

respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated

18.08.2022 within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt

of copy of the order. There shall be no order as to costs.

The Miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand

automatically closed.

_______________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 26th October, 2022 gvl