Court directs Corporation to issue ads mentioning that revision changed into completed on courtroom orders
The Madras High Court on Friday directed the Greater Chennai Corporation to trouble commercials in newspapers stating that the recent assets tax revision had been carried out on the basis of court docket orders and that any character or political birthday party opposing the revision might be doing so at the threat of being hauled up for contempt of court.
Revision after 20 years
Justices N. Kirubakaran and Krishnan Ramasamy informed Additional Advocate General C. Manishankar that it turned into unfair on the part of positive political events to oppose the tax revision, which were performed after an opening of two decades, and after skipping 3 revisions which should have taken place once in 5 years as in keeping with the policies.
“You difficulty commercials in newspapers stating that the revision has been executed simplest on the premise of court docket orders. If any political party makes a hue and cry, it will be hauled up for contempt of court docket. What were those parties doing these kinds of years? They communicate in a special tone whilst they’re in strength and in a diametrically opposite tone while they’re now not in strength.
“How can the Corporation function without finances? It did not have cash even to pay damages during the 2015 floods. Now that the boundaries of the Corporation were increased, it turns into all the greater difficult to offer primary facilities without revising the assets tax charges, which have been constant someplace in 1998,” Mr. Justice Kirubakaran stated.
He went on to point out that the revisions that ought to have taken place in 2003, 2008 and 2015 were not executed due to the fact successive governments have been nervous of incomes the wrath of the humans.
“I think all folks that served as Corporation councillors in the course of this era need to be imposed with prices for having made the civic body starve,” he said.
‘Yielding to pressure’
Referring to the present government too having reduced the quantum of revision for rented residential premises in urban nearby bodies from a hundred% to 50% within days of pronouncing the first revision on the basis of court docket orders handed on July 17, the judge stated: “You also are yielding to pressure by means of decreasing the revision.”
He later directed the officials to provide details of the revision that should have been done within the remaining 3 revisions and adjourned similarly listening to of the case to Tuesday.