1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2554 OF 2009
Ispat Industries Ltd. Petitioners
vs.
The Collector,Dist.Raigad & ors. Respondents
Mr.Janak Dwarkadas, Sr.Advocate with
Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar, Sr.Advocate with Mr.S.K.Srivastav,
Advocate i/b.M/s.S.K.Srivastav for the petitioners.
Mr.S.N.Patil, AGP for the Respondents-State.
igCORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.
DATED : 2nd April, 2009
P.C.
Heard finally by consent of the parties.
2. The petitioners have challenged the various demand
notices including an order dated 12.02.2009 passed by
the respective respondents.
3. This Court by an Order dated 23.01.2009 in Writ
Petition No.1673-09-Ispat Industries Ltd. vs. The
Collector, Dist.Raigad & ors.,
ors. on earlier occasion,
where similar challenge was raised, observed as under:
“6. The Collector, Raigad is hereby directed
to decide the proceeding pending before him
with expeditious despatch, at any rate, within
six weeks from today. If the order of the::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:29:19 :::
2Collector is adverse to the petitioner, the
same shall not be given effect to for a periodof two weeks from date of its communication.
All rival contentions on merits are kept
open.”
4. The Collector instead of deciding the same on merits
directed the parties to approach under Section 247 of
the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (the Code) to
Sub Divisional Officer, Alibag.
5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Alibag has passed the
impugned
50% of
order
the
ig dated
amount
12.02.2009
as per demand
thereby
notices
directed
and
to pay
further
observed that preliminary hearing shall be after
depositing the money, by the Tahsildar. It appears that
the Authorities moved ahead on a foundation as if there
were pre-requisite orders passed by the Collector of
assessment as contemplated under Section 110 of the
Code.
6. Section 110 of the Code contemplates that the
Collector should determine non-agricultural assessment
for future, based upon amended notification. That is
also subject to approval of the Commissioner. It means
that the Collector is the only Authority to decide &
pass assessment orders and no other Officer. There is
nothing pointed out that the Collector can delegate this
power of determination of non-agricultural assessment of
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:29:19 :::
3
land in non-urban areas like the present one.
7. The respondents have filed affidavit dated
18.03.2009 and submitted that paragraphs 6 and 7 of the
said affidavit support the impugned demand by stating
that the non-agricultural assessment made by the
Tahsildar is correct. Those paragraphs as reproduced
below, no way supports the mandate that the Collector
should determine/assess first and then demand notice by
the Tahsildar to follow. An assessment order must
follow demand notice and not vice versa.
“6. I say that the State Government has made
Amendment to the Section 110(2) of Maharashtra
Land Revenue Code whereby the Non-agricultural
Assessment of land falling in Class-I villages
are required to be calculated at the rate ofnot more than 10 paise per sq.mtrs. instead of
original 2 paise per sq.mtr. and the land
falling in Class-II villages are required to becalculated at the rate of not more than 5 paise
per sq.mtrs. instead of not more than 1 paise
per sq.mtrs. I say that the lands owned by the
petitioner company are in villages falling in
Class-I and therefore, the Non-AgriculturalAssessment in respect of the said lands has
been calculated as 10 paise per sq.mtrs. As
per the Amendment to the Section 110(2) of
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code and also
instructions issued by Revenue and Forest
Department vide Circular No.NAAA/1005/CaseNo.7/L-5 dated 23/10/2007.
7. I say that the Non-Agricultural Assessment
made by the Tahsildar is absolutely correct and
made by the following lawful procedure.”
8. It is very clear therefore that there was no prior
assessment or such order passed by the Collector as
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:29:19 :::
4
contemplated under the Code. The demand notices
therefore issued before determinating the assessment as
required is therefore without jurisdiction. There is
nothing on record and/or even averred in the affidavit
that the Collector, at any point of time, though the
petitioners representation is pending for the same,
decided or passed any order of assessment as required.
Therefore such demand notices and all actions arising
out of the same including the insistence for 50% of the
amount before hearing of the Appeal which is admittedly
pending, is also without jurisdiction.
9. The petitioners are definitely bound to pay the
amount if assessed in accordance with law. Such
procedure & such demands are no where contemplated under
the Code. These demand notices and all actions arising
out of the same, according to me, are without
jurisdiction and void ab-initio.
10. Resultantly, the demand notices and the subsequent
actions/orders as issued by the respective respondents
are quashed and set aside. The Collector as
contemplated under the Code to decide and pass
appropriate assessment order, as early as, possible
after giving hearing to both the parties.
11. In view of above, it is necessary for the Collector
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:29:19 :::
5
to determine the non-agricultural assessment of the
lands. Therefore, the Collector, Raigad, is hereby
again directed to decide the application/representation
of the petitioners, if any, pending before him and even
otherwise, as referred above, at any rate, within six
weeks from today. If the order of the Collector is
adverse to the petitioner, the same shall not be given
effect to for a period of two weeks from date of its
communication. All rival contentions on merits are kept
open.
12. Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed in the
above terms. No order as to costs.
[ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.]
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:29:19 :::