JUDGMENT 1. A flat belonging to the petitioner at premises No. 74/1, Moulana Abdul Kalam Azad Sarani was valued at Rs.39,420/- with effect from 3rd Quarter 2005-2006. The petitioners without prejudice to their rights and contentions paid the rates and taxes but preferred an appeal before the appropriate forum. 2. DURING the pendency of that appeal, the Assessor/Collector by a letter dated 24th December, 2007 intimated the petitioners that the valuation fixed at Rs.39,420/- had been cancelled by the Municipal Commissioner vide his order dated 13th July, 2007 by invoking power under Section 192 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. By a subsequent communication the petitioners were asked to submit bills, rate card, tax pay receipts etc. Further notice dated 21st August, 2009 was issued to the petitioners proposing valuation at Rs.64,320/- with effect from 3rd Quarter 2005-2006. 3. THE cancellation of the valuation made by the Hearing Officer on 26th June, 2007 and all subsequent steps taken thereunder are under challenge in this writ petition. 4. MS. Bhattacharya, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the authorities acted illegally and with an ulterior motive. Mr. Mukherjee, the learned Advocate appearing for the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, tried to support the steps including the cancellation of the valuation dated 26th June, 2007 on the basis of Clauses (iv) and (v) of Section 192 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 which provides as follows:- "Section 192 - Amendment of Municipal Assessment Book- Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 190 the Municipal Commissioner may, at any time, amend the Municipal Assessment Book- (iv) by increasing or decreasing for adequate reasons the amount of any annual and of the [property tax] thereupon; or (v) by making or cancelling any entry exempting any land or building from liability to [property tax]." 5. I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned Advocates, for the parties, and am of the view that the authorities indeed acted in violation of law. Any order passed by any authority is final which is also evidenced by Section 190 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The power given by Section 192 of the said Act is a special power which is in the nature of a power of review by the higher authority. It is well settled that the statutory authority can act strictly in accordance with the statute or not or at all. The power given by Section 192 of the said Act is a special power which is in the nature of a power of review by the higher authority. It is well settled that the statutory authority can act strictly in accordance with the statute or not or at all. The Municipal Commissioner was indeed entitled to increase or decrease the valuation for adequate reasons under Clause (iv) of Section 192 but he did not do any such thing. According to the letter dated 24th December, 2007 the Municipal Commissioner cancelled the order dated 26th June; 2007 which was not in his power. The power of increasing or decreasing the valuation bestowed upon the Municipal Commissioner under Section 192 could have been exercised by him and by him alone. This was not intended to enable the authorities to recall an order passed after hearing the parties and thereafter to propose a higher valuation. Clause 5 of Section 192 does not help the authorities either because that clause empowers the Municipal Commissioner to allow exemption or to cancel exemption to any land or building from liability to pay property tax. Therefore, Clause 5 does not have any manner of application. The Municipal Commissioner was, in fact, entitled to increase or decrease valuation for adequate reasons which he admittedly did not do. 6. I, therefore, find a lot of substance in the submissions advanced by Ms. Bhattacharya, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners. Therefore, the impugned order dated 13th July,2007 cancelling the valuation dated 26th June, 2007 is set aside and all further steps taken pursuant thereto are also set aside. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation shall pay costs assessed at 100 G.Ms., which the petitioners shall be entitled to deduct from out of the property tax payable in future. 7. THIS writ petition is thus disposed of. Let xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for by the parties, be delivered to them upon compliance of all usual formalities.