Satyabrata Sinha, J. - (1.) This appeal arises out of a judgement and order dated 7th February, 2000 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court whereby and where under the writ petition filed by the appellant herein was disposed of directing: "from the submission and counter submission advanced by both the learned counsel, I found that revision of annual taxation has to be made as per section 174 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act. In case of increase in annual valuation, the tenants/lessees/sub-lessees/occupiers are also relatively affected as they shall also be liable to pay the difference of rent to the landlord. Therefore, it is true that the Corporation may not have legal obligation to serve individual notice to each and every occupier but at the same time when the matter has not been concluded, opportunity should be given to them for raising objection, if any, within a reasonable time. It is for the landlord to communicate to those tenants/lessees/sub-lessees or occupiers as regards such increase in annual valuation proposed by the Corporation."
(2.) The only question which has been raised in this appeal is as to whether keeping in view the Division Bench decision of this court in Machinnon Machenzie & Co. Ltd. v. Calcutta Municipal Corporation & Ors., reported in AIR 1999 Cal 205 was a Special Bench decision in Land and Brick Entertainment Ltd. v. The Calcutta Municipal Corporation & Ors., A.P.O. No. 365 of 1996 disposed of on 13.10.1999 the learned trial Judge erred in issuing the aforementioned direction.
(3.) The appellant filed the writ application, inter alia, for the following reliefs : "(a) A writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order or orders and/or direction or directions of like nature commanding the respondents to forthwith rectify the records of the Assessment Department of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation in respect of the rents of the tenants of premises No. P-41, C.I.T. Scheme VIIE, Calcutta - 700 072 before taking us the hearing of the assessment case of the said premises for the period 2nd quarter 1997-98; (b) A writ in the nature of Mandamus and for an order or orders and or a direction or directions of like nature commanding the respondents to apportion the rental valuation of the said premises in accordance with section 174 and section 194 of the said Act before taking up the hearing of the assessment case of the said premises No. P-41, C.I.T. Scheme VIIE,Calcutta-700 072 for the period commencing 2nd quarter 1997-98; (c) A writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or an order or orders and/or a direction or directions of like nature commanding the respondents to forthwith issue notice of hearing of the tenants of premises No. P-41, C.I.T. Scheme VII E, Calcutta-700 072, before taking up the hearing of the assessment case; (d) A writ in the nature of Certiorary and/or an order or orders and/or a direction or directions of like nature commanding the respondents to quash and/or set aside any order or direction for proceeding with the hearing without rectifying the records relating rents of tenants of premises No. P-41, C.I.T. Scheme VIIE, Calcutta-700 072 and without notifying the tenants of such hearing, in order to render conscionable justice; (e) A writ in the nature of Prohibition and/or an order or orders and/ -or a direction or directions of like nature prohibiting the respondents from proceeding with the hearing of the assessment case of premises No. P-41, C.I.T. Scheme VIIE, Calcutta-700072 for the period commencing 2nd quarter 1997-98 without rectifying the Assessment Department records, ascertaining the rental valuations and without notifying the tenants regarding such hearing;";