R.M. Sahai, J. - (1.) AGGRIEVED by dismissal of her appeal filed Under Section 160 of U.P. Municipalities Act against alteration of assessment list Under Section -147 of the Act Petitioner owner of a house in district of Aligarh has come to this Court and seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing of both orders as they suffer from error apparent on the face of record.
(2.) IN 1974 notice Under Section 143 of the Act was served on Petitioner inviting objection if any against proposed enhancement of annual letting value of her house at Rs. 4800/ - and the house tax at Rs. 600/ -. It was objected by Petitioner and the Prescribed Authority decided the objection on 4 -1 -75. He determined annual valuation of house at Rs. 720/ - and house tax at Rs. 6250/ -. While doing he heard Petitioner and the Taxing Officer. He so looked into survey report and concerned documents. No appeal etc. was filed against this order. On 26 -6 -76 another notice Under Section. 147 (c) of the Act was served on Petitioner proposing to determine annual valuation of her house at Rs. 4800/ -. It was contested both on merits and non -applicability of Section 147(c) The Prescribed Authority however after hearing parties determined annual valuation of house at Rs. 3120/ - and house tax at Rs. 390/ -. In appeal the order was upheld as it was a newly constructed house having marble flooring in a busy locality. It was further found that Section 147 conferred ample power on Prescribed Authority to correct any mistake in the assessment list Review against this order also failed as Prescribed Authority in determining valuation of house at Rs. 760/ - had committed error which was rightly rectified Under Section 147. Section 147 empowers Board to alter or amend the assessment list in various contingencies contemplated in Sub -clause (a) to (g) of Sub -section (1). Most of them contemplate situations arising after assessment. For instance Clause (a) permits entering name of any person or property which ought to have been entered or property became liable to taxation after authentication of the assessment list. Clause (b) provides for substituting name of heirs or successors etc. and Clause (d) permits revaluation or reassessment if the value of property has increased by additions or alterations in the building. Sub -clause (c) with which we are concerned in this petition reads as under: by enhancing the valuation of, or assessment on any property which has been incorrectly valued or Assessed by reason of fraud, misrepresentation or mistake, or. This Sub -clause provides for exercise of power in four circumstances incorrect valuation of property or assessment by reason of fraud, misrepresentation or mistake. So far the last three are concerned there can hardly be any dispute that any order obtained by fraud or misrepresentation are liable to be set aside either by same or higher authority. In fact such orders are considered as nullity. But what about incorrect valuation of a property. Can it be set aside by Board at any time for any reason. For instance in this ca se no material was brought on record which could render the determination of annual valuation of Petitioner's house Under Section. 143 as incorrect. It was a change of opinion. Does the Sub -clause permit this? In our opinion it does not. An order passed Under Section 143 is subject to appeal Under Section. 160. If no appeal is filed within time the order attains finality. An order which becomes final cannot be reopened and should not be permitted to be reopened except in extraordinary circumstances. The contingency of incorrect valuation contemplated in the Sub -clause therefore should be understood in strict sense Even if it is not analogous to fraud or misrepresentation or mistake it should take colour from these strong expressions and the Board could have altered the list on account of incorrect determination due to some omission or tacking into factors which were not relevant etc. But it could not change the list in exercise of power under this section because it did not agree with opinion of its predecessor on same material.
(3.) IN the circumstances this petition succeeds and is allowed. The orders passed by appellate and assessing authority are quashed. Parties shall bear their own costs.;