Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Govel Trust Running Aravind Eye ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu

Madras High Court|03 August, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner trust, seeking a writ of Mandamus, to forbear the respondents from taking any steps to recover the urban land tax.
2.The case of the petitioner is that they are a charitable trust, running the Aravind Eye Hospital and the Post Graduate Institute of Ophthalmology, which are non-profit organizations. According to the petitioner, they were eligible to be exempted for Urban Land Tax for their lands in
i) T.S. Nos. 589/9G 589/8 589/12, 589/9D, 589/9E, 589/9F, 589/14, 589/15, Sindhupoondurai Village, Tirunelveli, in respect of W.P(MD)No.16280/16.
ii) Survey Nos. 21/2, 35/5, 35/6, 38 part, 38/2A part, 38/3A, 38/3B part, 38/3C part, 38/4, 38/3 part, 3324/4, 38/2, 38/1B, 38/2A part, 38/1B2 part, 38/6B2, 39/1, 39 part, 39/2, 40 part, 44 part, 44/2B part, 44/6, 45 part, T.S.No.455/1, 3324/2, 5029/2, 3321/2, in Sathamangalam Village, Madurai North, Madurai, in respect of W.P(MD)No.16281/16.
2.1.Therefore, they filed an application for the same before the Government, which was dismissed on 30.05.1997. Aggrieved by the same, they filed writ petitions in W.P.Nos.12510 to 12474 of 1997 and this Court, on 26.10.2007, remitted the matter back to the first respondent for passing appropriate orders after conducting proper enquiry. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner trust submitted an application under Section 29 of the Urban Land Tax Act, for exemption from Urban Land Tax before the first respondent, which is said to be pending. While so, the fourth and fifth respondent, demanded the petitioner to pay the said tax and aggrieved by which, the petitioner is before this Court.
3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that pending disposal of the application filed by them for exemption, the respondents should not initiate recovery proceedings.
5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, to give quietus, this Court directs the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the application filed by the petitioner, under Section 29 of the Urban Land Tax Act, seeking exemption from Urban Land Tax, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Until such time, the respondents are directed not to initiate any recovery proceedings.
6.With the above direction, these writ petitions are disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
To
1.Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai ? 9.
2.The Principal Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Reform, Chepauk, Chennai ? 5.
3.The Assistant Commissioner of Urban Land Tax, Tirunelveli.
4.The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli.
5.The Tahsildar, Tirunelveli.
.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Govel Trust Running Aravind Eye ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
03 August, 2017