Page 1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10568 /2014 [Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 7566 of 2014]

Walchandnagar Industries Limited …  Appellant (s)   

Versus

Municipal Corporation City of Pune and Others … Respondent (s)

J U D G M E N T  

KURIAN, J.:

   Leave granted.  

 2. Appellant filed Writ Petition No. 3791 of 2013 before the High  

Court of Judicature at Bombay. Prayer (i) reads as follows:

“(i) That  this  Hon’ble  Court  be  pleased  to  issue  an  appropriate Writ / Order / Direction in the nature of Writ  of  Certiorari  or  any  other  appropriate  Writ,  Order  or  Direction  quashing  and  setting  aside  the  impugned  Administrative  Order  bearing  No.  MA/UAV/127  dated  07th July, 2007 and the Entry No. 361 of Section 22 of  the  Ready  Recknor  purportedly  prepared  by  the  Respondent  No.  1  pursuant  to  the  said  impugned  Administrative Order baring No. MA/UAV/127 dated 07th  July, 2007, to the extent of determining the rate of 20  Paise / sq.ft. for deriving the Annual Rateable Value of  lands situated / included under the Hill  Top Hill  Slope  zone within the limits of the Respondent No. 1, since  

1

Page 2

the same is ultra vires the Article 14 and 13(2) of the  Constitution  of  India  and  the  Bombay  Provincial  Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, and the Rules framed  there under.”

3. High Court though took note of the challenge, declined to go  

into the constitutional  validity of the order dated 07.07.2007 and  

disposed of the writ  petition holding that all  issues regarding the  

liability of the appellant to pay property tax including the rate at  

which the property tax is to be paid would be considered by the  

appellate authority in the appeal pending before it.  

4.  Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, Shri K.  

K.  Venugopal  points  out  that  unless  the  High  Court  decides  the  

constitutional  validity of the order dated 07.07.2007 impugned in  

the writ petition, the appellate authority will not be in a position to  

take an effective decision in the appeal.  

5. Having heard Counsel on both sides, we are inclined to agree  

with the submission made by learned Senior Counsel appearing for  

the appellant. The constitutional validity of impugned order has to  

be considered by the High Court. Depending on the decision of the  

High Court on that issue only,  the appellate authority can take a  

decision as to whether the appellant is liable to be taxed in terms of  

the order dated 07.07.2007.

6. The impugned order is  hence set aside and the matter  is  

remitted to the High Court. Since the statutory appeal against the  

2

Page 3

imposition  of  tax  is  pending  before  the  appellate  authority,  we  

request  the  High  Court  to  dispose  of  the  writ  petition  as  

expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months from the date  

of receipt of copy of this judgment.  

7.  The appeal is allowed as above. There shall be no order as  

to costs.  

                                                   .....…..…..………… J.                                            (ANIL R. DAVE)

                                                           ..………..……………J.                           (KURIAN JOSEPH)

New Delhi; November 27, 2014.  

3