- (1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing and setting aside the demand notice issued by the respondent no. 2 - the Deputy Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation (RMC), Ranchi vide letter no. 733 dated 19.03.2020 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition), whereby enhanced licence fee and interest has been demanded from the petitioner on the alleged ground that the petitioner has occupied additional area than the area actually settled in his favour. Further prayer has been made for directing the respondent authorities to re-compute and determine the licence fee payable by the petitioner without computing any liability towards interest after taking physical measurement of the settled property/properties in occupation of the petitioner situated at East Circle, Church Road, Ranchi.
(2.) The respondent-RMC filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith a copy of order dated 29.05.2020 passed by the respondent no. 2. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an interlocutory application being I.A. No. 4063 of 2020 seeking amendment in the writ petition by inserting additional prayer for quashing the order dated 29.05.2020.
(3.) The factual background of the case as stated in the writ petition is that in the year 1974, vide resolution of Land Market Committee contained in memo no. 1213 dated 06.11.1974, an area of 60 ft. X 25 ft. land i.e., 1500 sq. ft. situated at plot no. 301, East Circle Church Road, Ranchi was settled in the name of one Panchu Tiwari i.e., the grandfather of the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "the original licensee"). Subsequently, adjacent area of 26 ft X 12 ft i.e., 312 sq. ft. was also settled in favour of the original licensee, who was doing the business of charcoal and firewood on the said piece of land. After the death of the original licensee, Panna Lal Tiwari (the father of the petitioner) and Hira Lal Tiwari stepped into the shoes of the deceased licensee and continued to pay the licence fee etc. for the total area admeasuring 1812 sq. ft. to the RMC. In the year 2010, Hira Lal Tiwari and Panna Lal Tiwari divided the said premises having total area of 1812 sq. ft. in the ratio of 60:40 and accordingly, Panna Lal Tiwari got an area of 1087.20 sq. ft. of the land and Hira Lal Tiwari got 724.8 sq. ft. of the land in question. The said division was duly recognized by the RMC and vide letter no. 1426 dated 15.05.2010 and separate licence fee was fixed by the respondent-authorities in favour of the father of the petitioner. In the year 2011, the father of the petitioner died leaving behind the petitioner as his only son and accordingly, the said premises was duly inherited by the petitioner which was also acknowledged by the RMC. The petitioner paid the rent, licence fee etc. upto 2015-16 for the settled premises to the RMC. However, from the financial year 2016- 17, the licence fee was not being accepted by RMC from the petitioner as well as his uncle Hira Lal Tiwari. The petitioner repeatedly visited the office of the RMC for acceptance of the licence fee etc. of the settled premises, but the RMC refused to accept the said amount from the petitioner and it was only verbally informed to him that the same was not being accepted on the alleged ground that he was in occupation of certain additional area than the area actually settled in his favour. The petitioner filed a detailed representation dated 28.03.2017 before the Chief Executive Officer, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi requesting inter alia to carry out physical verification of the premises in question to ascertain as to whether he is in occupation of any additional land or not and to determine the rent payable by him. The respondent-RMC paid no heed to the petitioner's representation and as such he along with Hira Lal Tiwari filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 1661 of 2018 for a direction upon the respondents to accept the yearly rent and licence fee against the settled premises for the year 2016-17 and 2017-18 from them and to renew the licences after accepting the licence fee for the said period. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 23.07.2018 with a liberty to the writ petitioners to prefer fresh representation(s) before the respondent no. 1 - the Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi with a direction to the said authority to verify the relevant records and to take appropriate decision in the matter within a period of 12 weeks from the date of filing of the representation. Pursuant to the order dated 23.07.2018, the petitioner filed a representation dated 14.08.2018 before the respondent no. 1, however, no action was taken and as such he filed contempt application being Cont. Case (Civil) No. 117 of 2019 which is still pending. In the meantime, the petitioner has been served a demand notice as contained in letter no. 733 dated 19.03.2020 (received on 22.05.2020) issued by the respondent no. 2, wherein he has been directed to pay enhanced licence fee @ 1.5 times of the licence fee payable by him in respect of the said premises on the alleged ground that he has occupied additional premises of 1569 sq. ft. The RMC further demanded @ 2 times of the licence fee for the extra premises allegedly occupied by the petitioner along with interest on the unpaid amount of licence fee for the financial year 2016-17 to 2019-20.;