Rajam v. The Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.02.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR Rajam ... Petitioner Vs.

The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai (City).

... Respondent P RAYER:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to receive the property tax comprised in Survey No.386/7, situated at PCM Chokku Pillai 1st Main Road, CAS Nagar, Avaniapuram, Madurai and issuing the receipt in the name of CHOKKUPILLAI NAGAR instead of RAM NAGAR on the basis of petitioner's representation dated 11.01.2022 within the time fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Selvakumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinayak Standing Counsel

O R D E R

Immovable property comprised in Plot Nos.9 and 10 in Survey No.386/7 in 41, Avaniapuram, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai District, being land admeasuring 4800 sq. ft., or thereabouts and a superstructure thereon [hereinafter 'said property' for the sake of convenience and clarity] is the subject matter of captioned main writ petition. It is the case of the writ petitioner that she purchased said property from one Chokkalingampillai in and by a registered sale deed dated 07.10.1994 registered as Document No.4241 on the file of the jurisdictional Joint Registrar, Madurai. 2.The case of writ petitioner is that the respondent Corporation has collected property tax for said property and issued receipts vide Assessment No.115/094/04083 Old Assessment No.115/624996 and a sample receipt as placed before this Court is as follows:

1/6

3.The specific complaint of the writ petitioner is said property is situate in Chokku Pillai Nagar and not Sriram Nagar as described in the receipt.

4.Mr.S.Vinayak, learned Standing Counsel for Madurai Corporation who had joined the virtual Court accepted notice on behalf of lone respondent.

5.Owing to the short and narrow compass on which captioned main writ petition turns, with the consent of learned Counsel on both sides main writ petition was taken up.

6.Learned Counsel for respondent on instructions submitted that it is necessary to make a site inspection and also verify the records to take a call on whether said property comes under Sriram Nagar or Chokku Pillai Nagar.

7.Learned Counsel for writ petitioner Mr.V.Selvakumar on instructions, notwithstanding the slightly expansive prayer submitted that it will suffice if there is a directive qua lone respondent to dispose of his representation dated 11.01.2022 with regard to the aforementioned complaint. In other words, learned Counsel for writ petitioner abridges the prayer and submits that a 2/6

Mandamus qua respondent for disposal of his aforementioned representation dated 11.01.2022 will suffice. The 11.01.2022 representation together with postal acknowledgment [track consignment report of the postal department] as placed before this Court is as follows:

3/6

4/6

This shall hereinafter be referred to as 'said representation'. 8.Captioned main writ petition is disposed of with a simple directive to the lone respondent to dispose of aforementioned said representation on its own merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as the business of the lone respondent would permit and in any event within two [2] months from today ie., on or before 01.04.2022. Though obvious, for the sake of clarity and specificity it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view or opinion in this order on the merits of the matter. The proceedings of lone respondent disposing of said representation of writ petitioner shall be communicated to the writ petitioner under due 5/6

acknowledgment within seven [7] working days from the date of disposal. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) MR NOTE: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai (City).

+1 CC to M/s.S.VINAYAK, Advocate ( SR-3487[F] dated 01/02/2022 ) 01.02.2022 NA(CO) KB(08.02.2022) 6P 3C 6/6