- (1.) RAJESH Tandon, J. Heard SriPankaj Miglani,Advocate for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) BY the present writ petitions, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 30-7-1986 passed by the Chief Judicial Mag istrate, Saharanpur. Briefly stated respondent no. 2 is the owner of the properties in question situated within the municipal limits of Nagar Palika, Haridwar. The petitioner prepared an assessment list relating to the properties of the respondent no. 2 giving the names of the Mohalla, de scription of the properties, their annual value and amount of tax assessed. The petitioner issued notices under sub section (1) section 141 and sub section (l) section 143 of U. P Municipalities Act, 1916 to respondent no. 2 imposition of House Tax and water tax which were served upon the respondent no. 2. Re spondent no. 2 has filed objection to the aforesaid notices on the ground that the property owned by respondent no. 2 is exempted from all taxes and as such the Municipal Board is not entitled to im pose any tax as the entire income of the property is spent for the religious and charitable purposes. According to the petitioner in the year 1983 the Municipal Board, Hardwar was superseded and the District Magistrate was appointed as Administrator who managed all the af fairs of the Board. On 4th may 1983 the Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut appointed the Officer In-charge Nagar Palika, Hardwar as Officer (Saksham Adhikari) under Section 143 (3) of U. P. Municipalities Act, for deciding the objec tions filed under section 143 (2) U. P. Mu nicipalities Act relating to the house and water tax. On 1-7-1983 the Competent Officer allowed the objection of respond ent no. 2. Feeling aggrieved by that order the Municipal Board has filed an appeal under section 160 of the U. P. Municipali ties Act, before the Chief Judicial Magis trate, Saharanpur, which was partly al lowed vide order dated 29-11-1983 and the order dated 1-7-1983 was set aside arid the property in question was valued for the purpose of house and water tax. Respondent no. 2 filed a review petition on 21-7-1984 under section 164 (2) of U. P. Municipalities Act, which was allowed by respondent no. 1 and has set aside his earlier order dated 29-11-1983, against which the present writ petition has been filed.
(3.) THE review petition was allowed on the ground that Nagar Palika has no right to prefer the appeal and the appeal can only be filed by the person upon whom the tax was imposed. THE view taken by the appellate Court in review petition cannot be allowed to sustain. Section 160 of the Municipalities Act provides as under : 160. Appeal relating to taxation (1) In the case of a tax assessed upon the annual value of buildings or lands or both an appeal against an order passed under sub section (3) of section 143 or under sub section (3) of section 147, and in the case of any other tax, an appeal against an assess ment, or any alteration of an assess ment, may be made to the District Magistrate or to such other officer as may be empowered by the State Gov ernment in this behalf. The petitioner having aggrieved by the assessment of house tax and water tax made by the Competent Of ficer has every right to file the appeal before the appellate authority.;