Uttarakhand High Court
SPA/295/2023 on 11 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL
SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 295 OF 2023
11TH AUGUST, 2023
BETWEEN:
Bhupendra Rawat .....Appellant.
And
State of Uttarakhand & others ....Respondents.
Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. Neeraj Garg, learned counsel.
Counsel for the State : Mr. J.C. Pande, learned Standing
Counsel.
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)
The present special appeal is directed against the
judgment dated 21.07.2023, passed by the learned Single
Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No.1851 of 2023. By the
impugned judgment, the writ petition preferred by the
appellant has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge.
2. The appellant had preferred the writ petition,
firstly, to assail the order dated 13.06.2023, whereby the
appellant's representation for reduction of rent- in respect of
the premises of the Corporation leased to the appellant, from
Rs.15,000 per month to Rs.5,000/- per month was rejected.
The appellant also assails the Recovery Citation dated
07.12.2022, issued by the Tehsildar, Tehri, Tehri Garhwal, as
well as the consequential notice dated 18.01.2023, issued by
the said authority. The appellant also assails the recovery
order/ certificate dated 16.11.2022, issued by the Executive
Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Tehri Garhwal to Collector,
Tehri, Tehri Garhwal.
3. The submission of Mr. Garg, learned counsel for the
appellant is that the issue raised by the appellant before the
learned Single Judge was whether the recovery of arrears of
rent could have effected by resort to the U.P. Land Revenue
Act, by considering the arrears of rent as arrears of land
revenue. According to the appellant, the arrears of rent could
be recovered only by instituting a Civil Suit, and not by resort
to coercive method prescribed in the U.P. Land Revenue Act.
4. The impugned judgment shows that the learned
Single Judge has squarely dealt with the said aspect of the
matter, and rejected the same.
5. Section 292 of the Uttarakhand Municipalities Act,
1916, provides that any arrears due on account of rent from
a person to the Municipality in respect of immovable
property, other than land vested in or entrusted to the
management of the Municipality, shall be recovered in the
manner prescribed by Chapter VI.
6. Chapter VI of the Act contains Section 173-A, which
provides that where any sum is due on account of a tax,
other than any tax payable upon immediate demand, from a
person to a Municipality, the Municipality may, without
prejudice to any other mode of recovery, apply to the
Collector to recover such sum together with costs of the
proceedings as if it were an arrear of a land revenue.
7. The submission of Mr. Garg is that Section 173-A
was brought in by way of an amendment of the Municipalities
Act vide U.P. Act No.26 of 1964, and it was not in the original
Chapter VI of the enactment. The submission is that Section
292, which is a provision contained in the Act from the
beginning would apply to Chapter VI, as originally framed,
and would not apply to the amended provisions contained in
Chapter VI.
8. The learned Single Judge has considered this
submission, and in our view, rightly concluded that Section
173-A, which is contained in amended Chapter VI of the said
Act, would be attracted to recovery of rent under Section
292.
9. We do not find any merit in the aforesaid
submission of Mr. Garg, since we completely agree with the
view of the learned Single Judge.
10. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
11. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.)
(RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.)
Dated: 11th August, 2023
NISHANT
