← Library
Madras High CourtWP/22659/2004allowed

A.M Ekambaranathar Thirukoil v. The Commissioner For Land

2016-09-06Honourable Mr Justice T. S. Sivagnanam4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.09.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM W.P.Nos.22659 of 2004 A/m.Ekambaranathar Thirukoil rep. By its Executive Officer Kanchipuram - 631 502 ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Commissioner for Land Reforms Ezhilagam, Chepauk Chennai - 600 005

2. The Asst. Commissioner Urban Land Tax Kundrathur Zone Kundrathur Main Road Porur, Chennai - 600 116

3. The Tahsildar Urban Land Tax Kanchipuram ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to extend the order of exemption dated 23.01.1979 passed by the Board of Revenue (ULC & ULT) to the land belonging to the petitioner temple situate in Kancheepuram District.

For Petitioner :

Mr.A.K.Sriram For Respondents :

Mr.K.Venkatesh Government Advocate

O R D E R

Heard Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.

2. The petitioner is the Arulmighu Ekambaranathar Thirukoil represented by its Executive Officer. The temple is under the

control of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department. In this writ petition, the petitioner temple seeks for a direction upon the respondent to extend the order of exemption dated 23.01.1979 passed by the Board of Revenue (ULC & ULT) to the lands belonging to the petitioner temple in Kanchipuram District.

3.The undisputed facts are that the petitioner institution vide G.O.Ms.No.1947 dated 17.09.1976 was totally exempted from the payment of Urban Land Tax, both in respect of vacant lands and lands on which buildings have been constructed, from which the institutions derives income, which is being used solely for the objects and purposes of such institutions. Subsequently, by the proceedings of the Board dated 23.01.1979, an order of exemption was granted under Section 27(1) of the Act, wherein the Government requested the Board of Revenue (ULC & ULT) to examine and dispose of the petition, pursuant to which the Board of Revenue granted total exemption to the petitioner institution from payment of Urban Land Tax with effect from fasli 1373 in respect of the lands in R.S.No.

1052/2, Tandairpet and the said exemption was subject to the following three conditions: (i)If the institution disposes of the vacant lands by sale, gift etc., it has to pay to the Government the entire amount of urban land tax payable from fasli 1373 and upto the date of such alienation but for exemption; (ii)the exemption will apply so long on the urban lands are specifically used for the purpose of the institution and if there is violation in the use or diversion of the income from the urban lands, the entire urban land tax shall be levied as provided for in the act; and (iii) the tax already paid by the institution, if any, will not be refunded.

4. It is not in dispute that at the time when the said order was passed, Kanchipuram was not brought within the scope and ambit of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Tax Act and only thereafter it was brought within the ambit of the Act, after which the third respondent called upon the petitioner to pay the Urban Land Tax in respect of the lands owned by the petitioner temple in Kanchipuram District. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to the first respondent and other authorities including the District Collector, Kanchipuram and respondents 2 and 3 clearly setting out the land holding of the petitioner temple in Kanchipuram District. In the said representation, the petitioner had specifically stated that the lands and buildings within the urban limits of Kanchipuram are let out to public as per the provisions of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act and as per the instructions given by the Government of Tamil Nadu from time to time and the amount is

spent purely for religious purpose. Further, it was brought to the notice of the officials that apart from the persons who have been recognized as tenants, there are several persons who are unauthorisedly occupying the lands owned by the petitioner's temple and are not paying single pie as rent to the said temple and therefore, requested that the order of exemption already granted in favour of the petitioner be extended to the lands owned by them in Kanchipuram District also.

5. Admittedly, the order of exemption was granted in favour of the petitioner temple under Section 27(1)(a) of the Act. The power under Section 27(1) is quite distinct from the power to grant exemption under Section 29 of the Act. In terms of Section 27(1), the Government if being satisfied that the payment of urban land tax in respect of any class of persons will cause undue hardship, they may, subject to such rules as may be made in this behalf, by order exempt such lands or persons from the payment of urban land tax.

6. It is no doubt true that in the order of exemption dated 23.01.1979, the exemption was granted for the lands owned by the petitioner temple at Tondiarpet, V.O.C. Nagar and Egmore and at that point of time, the lands in Kanchipuram District did not fall within the ambit of the Act. However, the test would be whether the institution would come within the purview of the Act to be exempted. As long as objects of the exemption are fulfilled as the lands have been used for the purpose of the institution without any deviation, the exemption should enure in favour of the petitioner's institution.

Therefore, the fact that the first respondent has not passed any orders on the representation will not be a ground for the third respondent or Municipality to levy and demand urban land tax from the petitioner in respect of the land owned by the petitioner in Kanchipuram District. Further it is to be noted that the lands owned by the petitioner is being encroached by several third parties, who are not paying any rent. Therefore, this factor also should be borne in mind by the respondents 1 and 2 while examining the prayer for exemption. In the light of the above, the petitioner is entitled to succeed in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, by directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the prayer for exemption sought for by the petitioner in terms of the above directions. No costs.

gpa To

1. The Commissioner for Land Reforms Ezhilagam, Chepauk Chennai - 600 005

2. The Asst. Commissioner Urban Land Tax Kundrathur Zone Kundrathur Main Road Porur, Chennai - 600 116

3. The Tahsildar Urban Land Tax Kanchipuram.

+1cc to Mr.A.S.Kailasam & Associates, Advocate, S.R.No.50869 +1cc to the Special Government Pleader(T), S.R.No.51177 W.P.No.22659 of 2004 NR(CO) CA(22/09/2016)