(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in Notice No. 082/0038572 dated 27.05.2025 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and as against the provisions of Section 81, 82 (4), 82 (5) and 83 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act 1998 as amended r/w. Rules 257 and 262 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Rules 2023 and pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.)

1. The petitioner has challenged the impugned notice bearing No. 082/0038572, dated 27.05.2025, whereby the petitioner has been called upon to pay a tax amount of Rs.6,78,680/-.

2. It appears that the petitioner has put up four separate constructions and has been assessed separately in respect of each of the four buildings. The petitioner has challenged only one of the assessment orders.

3. According to the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, the total amount due from the petitioner exceeds Rs.44,00,000/-, and the petitioner has tacitly accepted the assessments in respect of the other three buildings.

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed three other writ petitions challenging the remaining assessments, which are yet to be numbered.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the assessments have been made contrary to the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998, as amended and brought into force with effect from 13.04.2023, and the Rules framed thereunder.

6. On a specific query as to whether the petitioner had filed any returns as contemplated under the aforesaid Act and the Rules framed thereunder, the answer forthcoming is in the negative.

7. Likewise, on a specific query to the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents as to whether the respondents had taken any steps in compliance with the aforesaid provisions, the answer forthcoming is also in the negative.

8. However, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under the provisions of the aforesaid Act and, therefore, ought to be relegated to avail such remedy before the Appellate Authority.

9. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, and balancing the interests of both the petitioner and the respondents, I am inclined to remit the matter to the third respondent for passing a fresh assessment order, after duly complying with the provisions of the aforesaid Act and the Rules framed thereunder.

10. Since the petitioner has admittedly failed to file the returns as contemplated under the aforesaid Act and the Rules framed thereunder, such remand shall be subject to the petitioner depositing one-fourth of the amount assessed for each year in respect of the subject assessment.

11. Insofar as the other assessments are concerned, it is open to the petitioner to approach this Court challenging the respective assessment orders, in which event, appropriate orders will be passed, subject to the petitioner depositing one-fourth of the amount assessed in the impugned notices for the respective assessment years.

12. The third respondent shall proceed with the assessment strictly in accordance with the provisions of the aforesaid Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Needless to state, the petitioner shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing before final orders are passed.

13. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.