VIJAY BISHNOI,J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-firm being aggrieved with the notice dated 05.12.2016 (Annexure-11) issued by the Municipal Board, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, whereby the petitioner is asked to deposit the Urban Development Tax, other charges and payment of obligatory tax under the provision of Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009.
(2.) Learned counsel for the parties have submitted that in a similar controversy the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 556/2016 (Jai Narayan Vyas University v. The State of Rajasthan and Anr.) and two other connected special appeals decided on 13.07.2016 has disposed of the said appeals with the liberty to the aggrieved persons to submit their objections against the notices issued by the concerned Municipalities and further directed the concerned Municipalities that it shall consider the objections and pass the speaking order.
(3.) The judgment dated 13.07.2016 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 556/2016 (Jai Narayan Vyas University v. The State of Rajasthan and Anr.) and two other connected special appeals reads as under:- "This batch of appeals arises from a common order dated 23.4.2016. The learned Single Judge disposed the writ petitions with direction to the appellants for appearing before the respondent for assessment/reassessment of their liability for payment of obligatory taxes under section 102 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). We have heard Learned Senior Counsel for the parties. The controversy in the batch of writ petitions relates to payment of obligatory taxes under Section 102 of the Act. It provides a complete procedure for raising notice of demand under Section 130 of the Act and the opportunity to show cause if liability is disputed under Section 131(1) (b). There is also a provision for appeal under Section 121. Notices were given to the appellants under Section 128, 129 of the Act with opportunity to file objections within 30 days. Instead of filing the objections, the writ petitions came to be instituted. It does appear that the Learned Single Judge was assisted by placing the statutory provisions. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the writ petitions themselves were pre-mature by-passing the statutory procedure provided under the Act including the right to appeal provided therein. We have purposefully refrained from discussing or entering into the merits so as to prejudice either of them in view of the nature of directions contained hereinafter. The appellants are agreed that they shall file objections within 30 days from today. It shall be open for them to take all objections on facts and in law as they may be advised. We are informed that in some of the appeals objections may have been filed. Liberty is granted in them also to file fresh objections within the same period. The Municipality shall consider the objections, pass a reasoned and speaking order and then proceed in accordance with law. Needless to say that the remedies for the concerned, if aggrieved, would lie in an appeal under Section 121 of the Act. Since the Learned Single Judge had no occasion to consider the statutory scheme we set aside the order under appeal, in view of the nature of the directions given by us, to facilitate proper adjudication in accordance with law. The appeals stand disposed.";