- (1.) The Court : Since both these appeals involve identical question of law these are disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) In terms of section 188 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to the said Act of 1980) objections with regard to enhancement of valuation is to be disposed of by the Hearing Officer in the manner prescribed in the said section. Section 189 provides for appeal to be preferred against the decision of the Hearing Officer within 45 days from the date of service of a copy of the order passed by the Hearing Officer under section 188. Under Rule 9 of the Taxation Rules framed under the said Act of 1980 the order was to be communicated to the objector in Form H. Form H prescribes communicatibn of the said order in the said format. The words "copy of order" are also stipulated in Form H. However, the communication under Rule 9(2) which is commonly known as red card only specifies the enhanced or reduced valuation which is communicated to the objector and the objector, if aggrieved by such valuation, is to file an appeal before the Tribunal within 45 days from the date of receipt of the red card. In both these matters the writ petitioners challenged the relevant provisions of the rules by contending that since the Act mandated service of a copy of the order unless copy of the order was served upon the objector was precluded from availing his right under the statute to prefer an appeal from the said order and, as such, the Corporation was precluded from raising any supplementary bill on the basis of such order of the Hearing Officer.
(3.) The issue was gone into by two learned Judges of this Court.;