# Principal, Boys' High School & College/Holy Trinity School v. State of U.P. and others - **Citation:** (2012) 1 ILRA 392 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2012-04-03 - **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ (Tax) Petition No. 369 of 2010 - **Bench:** Sunil Ambwani, Pankaj Naqvi - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/principal-boys-high-school-college-holy-trinity-school-v-state-of-u-p-and-others-42166 - **Pages:** 4 ## Headnote U.P. Municipal Corporation Act 1959Section 177(c)-Demand of water tax @ 12-1/2 % of House tax-petitioner running Boys High School-never claimed exemption from water tax-if no assessment by Jal Nigam-water Tax can be charged on assessment made by Corporation -in absence of pleadingscannot be decided-apart from alternative remedy of appeal under Section 54-can make representation to Jal Sansthanpetition dismissed. Held: Para 9 & 10 The exemption from payment of house tax does not mean that the municipal authorities are prohibited from determining annual value of the building. Even if the petitioner is not liable to pay house tax in view of the exemption given under Section 177 (c), they could have filed objections to the assessment of the annual value of the building under the Municipal Corporation Act, 2004, as the same assessment can be made the basis of assessment of water tax under Section 53 (4) of the Act. There is nothing to show that the petitoner had filed any objection to the assessment of annual value of the school building under the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959. ## Text 392 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012 ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 03.04.2012 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUNIL AMBWANI, J. THE HON'BLE PANKAJ NAQVI, J. Civil Misc. Writ (Tax) Petition No. 369 of 2010 Principal, Boys' High School & College/Holy Trinity School Church Lane, Allahabad ...Petitioners Versus State of U.P. and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri A.D. Saunders Counsel for the Respondents: Sri Afzal Beg C.S.C. U.P. Municipal Corporation Act 1959Section 177(c)-Demand of water tax @ 12-1/2 % of House tax-petitioner running Boys High School-never claimed exemption from water tax-if no assessment by Jal Nigam-water Tax can be charged on assessment made by Corporation -in absence of pleadingscannot be decided-apart from alternative remedy of appeal under Section 54-can make representation to Jal Sansthanpetition dismissed. Held: Para 9 & 10 The exemption from payment of house tax does not mean that the municipal authorities are prohibited from determining annual value of the building. Even if the petitioner is not liable to pay house tax in view of the exemption given under Section 177 (c), they could have filed objections to the assessment of the annual value of the building under the Municipal Corporation Act, 2004, as the same assessment can be made the basis of assessment of water tax under Section 53 (4) of the Act. There is nothing to show that the petitoner had filed any objection to the assessment of annual value of the school building under the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959. (Delivered by Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani, J.) 1. We have heard Shri A.D. Saunders, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the State respondents. Shri Afzal Beg appears for the Allahabad Jal Sansthan, Allahabad, which is now known as Nagar Nigam, Allahabad. 2. This writ petition is directed against the demand of water tax for the year 200910 of Rs.3,61,025/-, at 12 1/2% of the annual value of the building, assessed by the Nagar Nigam, Allahabad for the house tax at Rs.21,87,800/-. 3. Brief facts giving rise to this writ petition are as follows:- "There is an institution known as Boys' High School & College, Allahabad. The institution imparts education up to Class XII and is affiliated to the ICSE. There is a church known as 'Holy Trinity Church, Allahabad' for Christians' worship. Alongwith the church building there was open land of the church. On the campus of the church there is a hall known as 'Knox Hall'. This hall stands independently and is used for church's religious activities. Till date this hall is used for church activities as and when required. Boys' High School & College which had been established in the year 1860 required an additional annexe as the 1 All] Principal, Boys' High School & College/Holy Trinity School V. State of U.P. and others 393 admission of student was falling beyond its capacity. The management decided to open an annexe in the campus of Holy Trinity Church with the permission of the Church. This annexe was known as 'Holy Trinity School (Annexe of Boys' High School & College) Allahabad. Holy Trinity Church gave permission for opening of the annexe as it was for the charitable and good cause. Accordingly Holy Trinity School, an annexe of Boys' High School & College was opened in the year 1987. It is submitted that Holy Trinity School is only an annexe of Boys' High School & College, being part and parcel of the said school and is not a separate institution. Nagar Nigam, Allahabad (earlier known as Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad) imposed house tax in respect of 'Knox Hall' for a certain amount under the heading 'Knox Memorial Hall' and for the year 1999 made an assessment of Rs.386.40, which was duly paid on 12.7.1999, even though 'Knox Hall' stood exempted being church property used for religious activities. However, to avoid any controversy the amount of Rs.386.40 was paid in respect of 'Knox Hall'. The Nagar Nigam, as it is now known, made an assessment dated 29.10.2002 in respect of Knox Memorial Hall, 16/2 Church Lane, Allahabad for Rs.24,26,403/- alleged to be for the period 1.10.1997 to 31.3.2003 taking the annual rental value to be Rs.21,37,800/- and imposed House Tax @ 22% of the annual value of Knox Hall." 4. Rt. Rev. A.R. Stephan, Bishop of Lucknow, Church of North India has filed a separate Writ Petition No.2996 of 2002, against the assessment of the house tax on the same property, claiming exemption under Section 177 (c) of the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959 for payment of house tax. An interim order was passed staying the levy and realisation of the house tax. By a separate judgment we have allowed the writ petition today with the findings that Section 177 (c) of the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959, as amended from time to time, provides for an exemption from general tax on the school buildings, whether they are aided by the government or not. 5. In this writ petition we are concerned with the payment of water tax, which is closely linked and is based on percentage of the payment of house tax, but is levied for different object and purpose namely establishment and maintenance of the water supply and sewerage services in the urban areas. 6. There is no exemption provided under the U.P. Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975 to the school buildings, whether they are aided by the State Government or not from payment of water tax. The water tax is to be paid on the basis of assessment of the annual value at the rates prescribed under Section 52 (2), which shall not be less than 6% and not more than 14%, and sewerage tax, which shall not be less than 2% and more than 4% of the assessed annual value of the premises as government may from time to time after considering the recommendation of the Nigam by notification in the gazette declare. The water tax is to be paid irrespective of the fact whether owner or occupier of the building has applied for water connection, if it is within the radius prescribed from the nearest stand post or other water works at which water is made available to the public by Jal Sansthan vide Section 55 (b) of the Act. The 394 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012 Rules have been framed prescribing the radius to be 100 mtrs. from the nearest ferrule. 7. In the present case it is submitted by Shri Arun Saunders that the school has not applied for any water connection nor does it have any water tap to which water is supplied by the Nagar Nigam. He has, however, not denied that the main water line are passing within 100 mtrs. of the school and thus restrictions on levy of tax under section 55 on the proximity with availability of water supply made by Nagar Nigam, are not applicable to the school. 8. We do not find any substance in the contention that since the school building is exempt from the house tax, the Nagar Nigam cannot rely on the assessment of house tax for the assessment of the water tax. Section 53 (1) (a) of the Act, provides for making assessment for educational institution at the rate of 5% of the market value of the premises. The method of assessment is different from the assessment provided to be made under the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959. Subsection (4) of Section 53, however, provides that until assessment of annual value of the premises in any local area is made by Jal Sansthan, the annual value of the premises in local areas will be assessed by local body concerned for the purposes of house tax, which were deemed to be annual value of the premises for the purposes of the levy of water tax. Sub-section (4) of Section 53 is quoted as below:- "53 (4). Until an assessment of the annual value of premises in any local area is made by the Jal Sansthan or any other agency specified under sub-section (2) the annual value of all premises in that local area, as assessed by the local body concerned for the purposes of house tax shall be deemed to be the annual value of the premises for the purposes of this Act as well." 9. The exemption from payment of house tax does not mean that the municipal authorities are prohibited from determining annual value of the building. Even if the petitioner is not liable to pay house tax in view of the exemption given under Section 177 (c), they could have filed objections to the assessment of the annual value of the building under the Municipal Corporation Act, 2004, as the same assessment can be made the basis of assessment of water tax under Section 53 (4) of the Act. 10. There is nothing to show that the petitoner had filed any objection to the assessment of annual value of the school building under the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959. 11. The rate of water tax is to be fixed between 6% to 14% and the sewerage tax between 2% to 4%, on the assessed annual value of property, as State Government may from time to time after considering the recommendation of the Nigam declared in the notification in the gazette. 12. We do not find that there is any pleading or any objections were filed that rate of water tax should be reduced on the school run by the petitioner, as an educational institution run by a charitable society. 13. It is always open to the petitoner to make a representation to the Nagar Nigam to be forwarded to the State Government, to reduce the rates of water tax and sewerage tax on the schools. 1 All] Rajendra Singh V. State of U.P. and others 395 14. We also find that under Section 54 of the Act there is appeal provided against the assessment to the Prescribed Authority. 15. On the aforesaid discussion, we dismiss the writ petition with liberty to the petitoner to make objections to the Jal Sansthan, Allahabad, which is now a part of the Nagar Nigam, and if the petitoner is still aggrieved file an appeal to the Prescribed Authority. This order, however, will not be treated as any restrained order on payment of water tax, which should be paid regularly until the petitioner's representation or appeal, as the case may be, is decided. --------- APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 19.04.2012 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SYED RAFAT ALAM, C.J. THE HON'BLE VIKRAM NATH, J. Special Appeal No. - 680 of 2012 Rajendra Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of U.P. and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri R.K. Pandey Sri S.P. Sharma Counsel for the Respondents: C.S.C. U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1991-Rule 8 (2) (b)-Dismissal from service without recording reasons-for satisfaction regarding impossibility of holding inquiry-set-a-side but direction to hold inquiry as fresh-held not proper where the delequent employee already retired-as is clear from opening words of Rule 8- " No Police Officer mean Officer the member of force-but a retired Police Officer-is not member of Force-direction to held inquiry not proper-petition allowed with all consequential benefits. Held: Para 14 Therefore, the first direction in the order of the learned Single Judge to hold an enquiry after giving proper opportunity cannot be given effect to unless the appellant is allowed to continue on the strength of the force or in other words to continue in service, otherwise no enquiry could be conducted against him under Rule 8 of the Rules. (Delivered by Hon'ble S.R.Alam, C. J.) 1. This intra-court appeal arises from the order of the learned Single Judge dated 26th March, 2012, passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.54347 of 1999. The operative portion of the order of the learned Single Judge is reproduced hereunder :- "Since no reason has been given in the impugned order as to why it was not possible to hold an enquiry order under rule 8(2)(b) is not fully justified. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct the respondents to hold an enquiry in the matter and give to the petitioner a proper opportunity of hearing. The respondent authority shall conclude the enquiry in accordance with law within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order being placed by the petitioner before the respondent authority within ten days from today. It is made clear that this order will not amount to an order of reinstatement or setting aside the order of termination but this is being passed for this purpose of giving to the petitioner a proper opportunity of hearing.