Full Judgment Text
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.2866 OF 2006
CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPOTRATION ... APPELLANT(S)
VS.
SARPANCH, GRAM PANCHAYAT AND ORS. ... RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
C.A.NOS. 4368/2006 AND 5151/2007 &
C.A.NO.6682/2015 @ SLP(C)NO.19057/2009
J U D G M E N T
ANIL R. DAVE, J.
1. Leave granted in SLP(C)No.19057/2009.
JUDGMENT
2. The dispute raised in these appeals pertains to the
dispute on liability to pay tax. The appellant claims
that since they have been included in the area carved out
of the Gram Panchayat, under the Maharashtra Regional and
Town Planning Act, 1966, they are not liable to pay the
tax to the Gram Panchayat concerned. When these appeals
th
were heard before us on 16 April, 2015, this Court
passed the following order :
1
Page 1
“The short question which is involved in
these appeals is whether the land and buildings
in question are located within the local limits
of three Gram Panchayats, namely, Pagote,
Bhendkhal and Kalamboli, in District Raigad.
It is the case of Respondent
No.1-Panchayats in each of the appeals is that
the said properties are situated within their
limits and therefore, they are entitled to
collect tax on the properties situated therein.
Whereas, it is the case of the appellants that
the land has already vested in CIDCO and
therefore, the Gram Panchayats do not have any
right to collect property tax.
Looking at the facts of the case, the
Principal Secretary, Urban Development
Department, Government of Maharashtra, is
directed to state whether the land and properties
in question are within the limits of the
afore-stated three Gram Panchayats. He shall
also place on record copies of relevant
Notifications and maps giving details about
revenue limits of the afore-stated three Gram
Panchayats.
nd
List the matters on 22 July, 2015, at
2.p.m. as Part-heard.
A copy of the order be given to the
Standing Counsel for the State of Maharashtra by
dasti and a copy be also forwarded to the
Principal Secretary, Urban Development
Department, Government of Maharashtra by Speed
Post.”
JUDGMENT
3. Pursuant to the order referred to above, the State
Government had filed an affidavit in each of these
th
appeals. Paragraph 3 of the affidavits dated 20 August,
2015 read as under :
C.A.No.2866/2006 :
“3. I say and submit that, from the
information and report collected, the property
mentioned in the aforesaid Civil Appeal which is
leased to the Appellant is situated at Pagote
(hereinafter referred to as the “said property”).
2
Page 2
I say that, said property is within the limit of
Grampanchayat Pagote, District Raigad.
The map giving details regarding the location
of the said property in the corresponding revenue
limit of said Grampanchayat is herein annexed and
marked as Annexure P/1.
st
The relevant notification dated 1 February,
1995 of the said revenue village Patoge is annexed
herewith and marked as Annexre P/2.”
C.A.No.4368/2006 :
“3. I say and submit that, from the
information and report collected, the property
mentioned in the aforesaid Civil Appeal which is
leased to the Appellant is situated at Bhendkal
(hereinafter referred to as the “said property”).
I say that, said property is within the limit of
Grampanchayat Bhendkal, District Raigad.
The map giving details regarding the location
of the said property in the corresponding revenue
limit of said Grampanchayat is herein annexed and
marked as Annexure P/1.
st
The relevant notification dated 1 February,
1995 of the said revenue village is annexed
herewith and marked as Annexre P/2.”
C.A.No.5151/2007 :
“3. I say and submit that, from the
information and report collected, the property
mentioned in the aforesaid Civil Appeal which is
leased to the Appellant is situated at Kalamboli
(hereinafter referred to as the “said property”).
I say that, said property is within the limit of
Grampanchayat Kalamboli, District Raigad.
JUDGMENT
The map giving details regarding the
location of the said property in the corresponding
revenue limit of said Grampanchayat is herein
annexed and marked as Annexure P/1.
st
The relevant notification dated 1 February,
1995 of the said revenue village, Kalamboli, is
annexed herewith and marked as Annexre P/2.”
4. In view of the specific stand thus taken by the
3
Page 3
State Government that the area comes under the Gram
Panchayat concerned, we find no merit in the appeals.
They are, accordingly, dismissed with no order as to
costs. The interim order, if any, stands vacated.
5. As a sequel to the dismissal of these appeals, the
pending applications also stand disposed of.
..............J.
[ANIL R. DAVE]
..............J.
[MADAN B. LOKUR]
..............J.
[KURIAN JOSEPH]
New Delhi;
th
25 August, 2015.
JUDGMENT
4
Page 4