- (1.) The petitioners in this WP under art. 226 of the Constitution of India dated July 17, 2001 are seeking the following principal reliefs:-- a) A writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding the respondents and/or each of them, their servants agents or assigns to forthwith:-- (i) recall and/or rescind and/or set aside the purported assessment order dated 3rd September, 1998 passed by the Hearing Officer-IV fixing annual valuation of premises No. 15, Canal East Road, Kolkata-700 067 at Rs. 17,82,250/- being annexure "P-5" hereof. (ii) Recall and/or rescind and/or set aside the purported demand notice dated 2nd November 2000 passed by the Assessor-Collector(North) demanding a sum of Rs. 1,04,75,884.21 being annexure "P-6"; (iii) Not to take any step and/or and further step and/or initiate any action and or any further action on the basis of or pursuant to the purported assessment order passed by the 3rd September, 1998 being annexure "P-5" hereof as also the demand notice dated 2nd November, 2000 being annexure "P-6"; The Calcutta Municipal Corporation issued a notice dated February 6, 1998 to the first petitioner under section 184(3) of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The first petitioner was informed that the premises in question had been assessed at an annual value of Rs. 24,82,980 with effect from 3/1992-93; that it was entitled to submit a written objection against the valuation under s. 186 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980; and that the objection, if filed, would be heard by the Hearing Officer IV on April 30, 1998.
(2.) The first petitioner filed its written objection against the proposed annual value. The Hearing Officer heard the first petitioner, considered the material evidence and the written objection; and passed an order dated September 3, 1998 determining the annual valuation at Rs. 17,82,250. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Hearing Officer dated September 3, 1998, the first petitioner filed an appeal under section 189(5) of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 on October 12, 1998 (list of dates).
(3.) It, however, did not pay the deposit according to the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 189. Since the first petitioner did not pay the deposit pursuant to sub-section (6) of section 189, the Corporation issued a notice dated November 2, 2000 asking it to pay tax according to the determination of the Hearing Officer dated September 3, 1998. Under the circumstances, questioning the demand notice dated November 2, 2000 and the order of the Hearing Officer dated September 3, 1998 this WP was filed.;