Research › Browse › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

1999 DIGILAW 120 (CAL)

Rai Bhagvan Das Bagla B. M. Hindu Hospital v. Calcutta Municipal Corporation

1999-03-24

Prabir Kumar Samanta

body1999
JUDGMENT The Court: This is a writ petition for a direction upon the respondent Calcutta Municipal Corporation to grant exemption from payment of consolidated rates in exercise of the power under section 172 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The case of the petitioner is that the premises in question is being used by the writ petitioner for public charitable purposes including medical reliefs to the poor free of charge and as such the respondent Calcutta Municipal Corporation is under obligation to grant such exemption from payment of consolidated rates in respect of the above premises. 2. Section 172 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 reads as hereunder : "172. Exemption of lands and buildings from consolidated rate:-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing sections in this Chapter,- (a) (i) lands or buildings or portions thereof exclusively used for the purpose of public worship, or (ii) lands or buildings exclusively used for the purpose of public burial or as burning ground, or any other place used for the disposal of the dead duly registered under this Act, or (iii) open spaces including parade grounds which are the properties of Government, shall be exempt from the consolidated rate. Explanation.-For the purpose of sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of this sub-section any land or building used for the purpose of public worship shall not be deemed to be exclusively used for such purpose if on such land or in such building any trade or business is carried on or any rent is derived in respect of such land or building; (b) the Mayor-in-Council may exempt from the consolidated rate- (i) any land or building the annual value of which does not exceed three hundred rupees : Provided that where a person owns or occupies more than one piece of land or more than one building and the aggregate, annual value of all such lands and buildings exceeds three hundred rupees, such lands and buildings shall not be exempt from the consolidated rate; (ii) any land or building exclusively used with the approval of the Mayor-in-Council for the purpose of public charity or for the purpose of medical relief to or education of the poor, free of charge; (iii) any land used for street, any open space for public playground, or any public park under any of the statutory bodies mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (8) of section 171. (2) The Municipal Commissioner shall cause to be maintained a register showing separately the lands and buildings exempted from the consolidated rate under sub-section (1) in such form as may be determined by regulations and such register shall be open to the public for inspection." 3. On perusal of the said section it appears that the Mayor-in-Council has been given power to grant such exemption if the land or building in question is exclusively used with his approval for the purpose of public charity or for the purpose of medical relief to or education of the poor, free of charge. Thus the question of exemption arises only when the land or the building in question has been approved by the Mayor-in-Council as being used for the purpose of public charity and medical reliefs and/or education of the poor free of charge. It. does not appear from the materials annexed to this writ petition that there is such approval by the concerned Mayor-in-Council either upon the representation of the writ petitioner or upon consideration of the relevant facts and circumstances relating to the public charity and/or the medical reliefs to the poor free of charge as alleged by the writ petitioner. In the absence of such approval the use of the premises in question for the purpose of public charity or for the purpose of medical reliefs to the poor free of charge the question does not arise for grant of necessary exemption from payment of consolidated rates in exercise of the power under section 172 of the said Act. In all these views and in the absence of such an approval by the concerned Mayor-in-Council as per clause (ii) of sub-section (1) (b) of section 172 of the said Act there is no obligation upon the concerned authority to grant exemption in exercise of the power under the said provisions of the Act. 4. Accordingly the writ petition for a direction upon the respondent Calcutta Municipal Corporation to exercise it's power under the said provisions of the Act does not merit any consideration and hence the same is dismissed. 5. All parties are to act on a signed xerox copy of this dictated order on the usual undertaking. Writ petition is dismissed.