P.K. Samanta, J.@mdashThe West Bengal Central Valuation Board (Amendment) Act, 1994 (hereinafter called as Amendment Act of 1994 in short) brought about a major change in the Principal Act namely the West Bengal Central Valuation Board Act, 1978 (hereinafter called as the said Act). By Amendment Act of 1994 the provisions relating to the publication of draft valuation list of lands and buildings in a Municipality and finalisation of such valuation list upon hearing objection against such draft valuation were omitted. The West Bengal Central Valuation Board (Valuation of Lands and Buildings) Rules, 1984 (hereinafter called as said Rules in short) was similarly amended by a notification dated 30th March, 1994 so as to make the said Rules prescribing the mode and manner in which the objection petition against the draft annual valuation shall be filed and determined were omitted. The vires of the aforesaid Amendment Act of 1994 and the said notification has been challenged on the ground that the same violated the principles of natural justice and in the process Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In these petitions the petitioners are the owners and/or occupiers of lands and buildings situated in a Municipal Area namely Bidhannagar Municipality. Under the relevant Municipal Laws lands and buildings are assessed for payment of Municipal Tax on the basis of annual valuation determined thereon. Lands and buildings of the petitioners within the Bidhannagar Municipal Area are governed by West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993. Annual value of a land or building which forms the basis for imposition or municipal tax is not real or market value of the property but a valuation as defined in the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 which is the gross annual rental at which the premises is reasonably expected to let.
2. Section 110 of the Municipal Act, 1993 provides for preparation of such annual valuation of a holding within a Municipal Area which reads as under:
Preparation of valuation and assessment list. (1) The annual valuation of holdings under this Chapter shall be made, unless otherwise directed by the State Government, by the Central Valuation Board, established under the West Bengal Central Valuation Board Act, 1978 (West Bengal Act LVII of 1978) and the preparation of valuation list including determination of all objections shall abide by the provisions of that Act.
(2) When the Chairman-in-Council is directed by the State Government to undertake the preparation of annual valuation, it shall determine the annual value of all holdings within a municipal area in the manner provided in this Chapter and cause publication of the assessment list in the prescribed manner.
3. Thus, annual valuation of a holding within a Municipal Area is to be determined finally by the Central Valuation Board established under the West Bengal Central Valuation Board Act, 1978 by following the procedure prescribed therein.
4. Section 9 of the West Bengal Central Valuation Board Act, 1978 authorised the State Government to specify the area where annual general valuation of lands and buildings shall be made by the Board established under the said Act by issuing notification in this regard. Sections 10, 11 and 12 of the West Bengal Central Valuation Board Act, 1978 read as under:
Section 10. Publication of the draft valuation list.- (1) When the valuation u/s 9 of the lands and buildings in any area has been completed, the Board shall cause such valuation and the amount of consolidated rate their on to be entered in a list.
(2) The Board shall publish the valuation list in such manner as may be prescribed and shall specify a date within which objection to the list may be Bled.
(3) After the expiry of the date specified in Sub-section (2) and within such period thereafter as may be prescribed, the objection shall be determined after giving the objector an opportunity of being heard by such officer or officers of the Board as it may specify in this behalf.
(4) The objections shall be filed and determined in such manner as may be prescribed).
Section 11. Publication of final valuation list. When objections have been determined, the Board shall prepare a final valuation list and shall give public notice of the place or places where such list may be inspected and the valuation together with the amount of consolidated rate thereon as recorded in the final valuation list shall, subject to the provisions of Sections 14 and 15, be conclusive.
Section 12. Amendment of valuation list by Board. The Board may. for reasons to be recorded in writing, amend the valuation list at any time before the date specified for filing objections under Sub-section (2) of Section 10.
5. The West Bengal Central Valuation Board (Amendment) Act, 1994 (hereinafter called as Amendment Act) brought about a major change in the said Act. In particular Sections 5 and 7 of the Amendment Act of 1994 omitted Sections 10 and 12 respectively of the Principal Act and by Section 6 of the said Amendment Act Section 11 of the Principal Act was substituted by the following Section 11:
Publication of final valuation list. When the general valuation of lands and buildings has been made by the Board u/s 9, the Board shall prepare a valuation list and shall give public notice of the place or places where the valuation list may be inspected and the valuation as aforesaid together with the amount of (consolidated rate or property tax, as the case may be, payable thereon) as recorded in the valuation list shall, subject to the provisions of Sections 14 and 15 be conclusive. The Board shall also give notice in writing to the owner or to the lessee. Sub-lessee or occupier of any land or building, as the case may be, in all cases in which the valuation of such land or building is made for the first time or the annual valuation of such land or building is increased :
Provided that the valuation list as aforesaid may be prepared and published in respect of all the holidays of (any municipal area or any area within the jurisdiction of a corporation) specified in the notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 9 or the holdings of (any municipal area within such group of wards or any area within such group of wards within the jurisdiction of a corporation) as the State Government may determine.
6. Correspondingly by notification dated 30th March, 1994 the said Rules were amended by omitting the Rules 6 to 10 which prescribed the mode and manner for filing objection against draft publication of valuation list and determination thereof. Both by the aforesaid Amendment Act and the said notification the draft valuation list was amended as the valuation list. The provisions for publication of the draft valuation list and filing objection thereto were amended as the provisions for publication of valuation list and filing review application thereto.
7. Thus, in substance the aforesaid Amendments delated the provisions of draft publication of a valuation list containing the valuation of lands and buildings determined by the Board u/s 9 of the Act of 1978 and finalisation of such valuation by inviting objection against the same from the occupiers/or owners of the holdings and also by giving an opportunity of hearing to such owner or occupier who filed such objection against the valuation made by the Board. Under the amended provisions the valuation so made by the Board u/s 9 of the said Act shall be final subject to the provisions of review under Sections 14 and 15 as amended by the said Amendment Act. Sections 14 and 15 of the said Act as amended are reproduced hereunder :
Section 14. Application for review. (1) The owner or occupier or any other person primarily liable to pay consolidated rate (or property tax, as the case may be) may, if dissatisfied with the valuation of any land or building as entered in the valuation list, apply to the (co-operation or the Board of Councillors concerned) to review the valuation.
(2) The application shall be filed within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed.
(3) Every application presented under Sub-section (1) shall be heard and determined by a Review Committee constituted u/s 15 in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed.
(4) No application under Sub-section (1) shall be entertained unless the amount of consolidated rate (or property tax. as the case may be) on the previous valuation of the land or building as aforesaid has been paid or deposited in the office of the Corporation or Municipality, as the case may be, before the application shall fail unless the amount of consolidated rate (or property tax, as the case may be) on the previous valuation as aforesaid is continued to be paid or deposited in the office of the Corporation or Municipality as the case may be, till such application is finally disposed of:
Provided that wherever the previous valuation refers to a valuation made under the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932 (Ben. Act XV of 1932) and in force on the date immediately before the commencement of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 (West Bengal Act XXII of 1993). no application under sub-section (1) shall be entertained unless the amount of consolidated rate on such previous valuation has been paid or deposited or is continued to be paid or deposited in the office of the concerned Municipality.
Section 15. Review Committee. (1) Every Corporation or Municipality shall by a resolution, constitute Review Committee or Review Committees to hear application presented under Sub-section (1) of Section 14.
(2) Every Review Committee shall be presided over by the Chairman or the Vice-Chairman of the Municipality and shall consist of two other members, being councillors of the (Municipality) as may be nominated by the (Board of Councillors) and another member, who shall be an officer of the Board having knowledge in the assessment of municipal valuation, deputed by the Board :
Provided that in the case of a Corporation the presiding officer and (the two other members) of the Review Committee shall be such persons as may be nominated by the Corporation from amongst the Councillors by a resolution.
Provided further that no decision of a Review Committee shall be invalid or called in question merely by reason of any vacancy in the composition of the Committee or absence of any members from a meeting thereof other than the presiding officer.
Provided also that the decision of a Review Committee shall be unanimous:
Provided also that when a Corporation of a Municipality is dissolved, the State Government shall constitute by notification the Review Committee consisting of a President and such number of other members as may be specified in the notification for the purpose of hearing applications for review.
(3) The Review Committee may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the valuation of land or building or may direct fresh valuation to be made after such further enquiry as the Review Committee may direct.
(4) If there is any difference of opinion amongst the members of the Review Committee, the matter shall be referred to the Board for decision.
(5) The decision of the Review Committee or of the Board, as the case may be, shall be final and no suit or proceeding shall lie in any Civil Court in respect of any matter which has been or may be referred to the Review Committee or has been decided by the Review Committee or the Board.
8. Again Rule 18 of the West Bengal Central Valuation Board Rules, 1984 laid down the procedure for hearing of review application which is as under:
Procedure for hearing of review application.
(1) If the applications not appear when the applicators is taken up for hearing, the Review Committee shall dispose of the application ex parte.
(2) The applicant shall be represented at the hearing either in person or through a duly authorised agent.
(3) The person appealing before the Review Committee shall be entitled to produce such evidence, oral or documentary, as the case may be, considered essential for establishing the objections raised in the review application.
Provided that the President may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, refuse to allow production of any evidence not considered essential for the purpose of hearing of the review application.
(4) When the hearing of an application is concluded, the President, shall after consultation with the other members, pass orders in writing giving reasons therefore and the order shall be signed by the President and also by the other member aggreeing to it.
(5) If the other members disagrees with the President he shall separately record his decisions and the reasons therefor.
(6) In case of such disagreement the matter shall be referred to the Board by the President for decision as required under Subsection (4) of Section 15.
(7) The Order on any application may be passed at the conclusion of the hearing on the same day or no some other date to be fixed by the President and made known to the person appearing before the committee.
(8) The Review Committee may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the valuation of land or building and may direct fresh valuation to be made after such further enquiry as the Review Committee may direct.
(9) Clerical or arithmetical mistakes in orders or patent errors or omissions therein may be corrected by the President.
(10) The result of the review shall be noted in the register of the review application.
(11) The President shall attest and mark with date any correction in the assessment list that may be necessary as a result of the decision of the Review Committee.
9. Thus, the valuation made u/s 9 of the said act shall be final subject to review which is here in the nature of a post decisional hearing. In this context, it is therefore necessary to consider whether the Amendment At of 1994 and amendment of the said Rules are violative of the principles of natural justice.
10. Mr. Samaraditya Pal, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners in one of the writ petitions drew my attention to the decisions reported in 12 FTR 393 (Seth Gurmukh Singh and Anr. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Punjab), 1976 (4) SCC 435 (Commissioner of Income Tax. West Bengali, Calcutta vs. Simon Carves Limited), AIR 1977 SC 1627 (State of Kerala vs. K. T. Shaduli Grocery Dealer etc.) and AIR 1995 Cal 26 for the proposition that the determination of annual valuation of any land or building for imposition of municipal tax on such land or building is a quasi-judicial function.
11. The Full Bench of Lahore High Court in the case of Seth Gurmukh Singh observed in page 415 of 12 I.T.R as under:
Under the law as it stands, while proceeding under Sub-section (3) of Section 23 the Income Tax Officer is bound to hear such evidence as the assessee may produce in support of his return and, if after hearing the evidence so produced, he still thinks that he is not satisfied on any particular point, he can require the assessee to produce further evidence on that point. To that extent he may be taken to proceed quasi-judicially, but his quasi-judicial functions begin and end here.
12. The Supreme court in dealing with a case of escaped assessment in the case of C.I.T. vs. Simon Carves Ltd. (supra) observed that the taxing authorities in making assessment of income, exercise quasi-judicial powers. And in the case of State of Kerala vs. E.T. Shaduli (supra) it laid down as under:
Now, the law is well settled that tax authorities entrusted with the power to make assessment of tax discharge quasi-judicial functions and they are bound to observe principles of natural justice in reaching their conclusions. It is true, as pointed out by this court in Dhhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. Commr. of IT, West Bengal ((1955)1 SCR 941: AIR 1955 SC 65, that a taxing officer "is not fettered by technical rules of evidence and pleadings, and that he is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as evidence in a court of law", but that does not absolve him from the obligation to comply with the jurisprudence of administrative law as principles of natural justice.
13. The Calcutta High Court in the case of Surendra Enterprise Put. Ltd. vs. Calcutta Municipal Corporation (supra) in dealing with an order for determination of annual valuation of a premises in question held in paragraph 3 of the said report that if there is a duty to make an assessment in accordance with law it implies that such duty shall be carried out by following the principles of natural justice as well as by giving the reasons. It is not merely an administrative order whereby the assessment is made. It is a quasi judicial order inasmuch as the effect of such order may adversely affect the right of a citizen regarding the enjoyment of a property.
14. Therefore, it is not difficult to conceive that municipal tax liability on lands and buildings results from the assessment of annual valuations of such lands and buildings. Such an assessment is in the nature of an assessment of tax inasmuch as municipal tax is level at the rate at which it has been prescribed under the relevant municipal laws on such annual valuation. Such determination of annual valuation is therefore a quasi-judicial function.
15. Again the principles of natural justice have come to be recognised in the making of law prescribing a procedure to be adopted in a quasi-judicial function under the statute. In paragraph 98 of the decision of the Supreme Court referred to by Mr. Pal and reported in AIR 1985 SC 1416 (Union of India vs. Tulsiram Patel) it was observed as under:
The principles of natural justice have thus come to be recognized as being a part of the guarantee contained in Article 14 because of the new and dynamic interpretation given by this Court to the concept of equality which is the subject matter of that Article. Shortly put. the syllogism runs thus : violation of a rule of natural justice result in arbitrariness which is the same as discrimination: where discrimination is the result of State action, it is a violation of Article 14. therefore, a violation of a principle of natural justice by a State action is a violation of Article 14. Article 14. however, is not the sole repository of the principles of natural justice. What it does is to guarantee that, any law or State action violating them will be struck down. The principles of natural justice, however, apply not only to legislation and State action but also where any tribunal authority or body of men. not coming within the definition of "State" in Article 12 in charged with the duty of deciding a matter. In such a case, the principles of natural justice require that it must decide such matter fairly and impartially.
16. The Supreme Court again relying on the principle laid down in State of West Bengal vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952 SCR 284 : AIR 1952 SC 75) held at paragraph 12 of the decision reported in (1993) 3 SCC 259 (D.K. Yadav vs. J.M.A. Industries Ltd.) cited by Mr. Pal that the principles of natural justice are part of Article 14 and the procedure prescribed by law must be fair and reasonable.
17. Mr. Balai Roy, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents on the other hand contended that Section 5 of the Amendment Act did not bring about a serious change in the said Act and there is in fact no violation of the principles of natural justice in the determination of the annual valuation of the land or building for the purpose of imposition of property tax within municipal area. It was contended that by the said amendment the determination of annual valuation made under the provisions thereof would be final by giving an opportunity of hearing in the review proceeding, if a review petition is filed against the same after publication of the final list of annual valuation. Mr. Roy accordingly contended that though the principle of natural justice is concomitant of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as agreed but the said article in its principle does not lay down a particular form and/or manner in which such principle of natural justice is to be followed. It is within the legislative competence to make laws and/or Rules by prescribing a particular procedure for a quasi-judicial function in which it is suited most in a particular situation and by not totally excluding the observance of the principle of natural justice from the entire scheme of the Act. Article 14 and the principles embodied therein cannot be read to mean that a quasi-judicial function must in all situations should be performed by prior opportunity of hearing and not by providing hearing at a post decisional stage. In other-words section 5 of the Amendment Act merely replaced the hearing at the initial slam of the determination of annual valuation by a hearing at a later stage alter a preliminary enquiry is made about a valuation of a land or building. Such valuation is arrived at upon such evaluation. Section 5 of the Amendment Act therefore substituted two hearings at two stages by one hearing before the Review Committee in relation to the determination of annual valuation. No one can demand in extension of the principles of natural justice, opportunities of hearing at every stage of the proceeding.
18. Mr. Roy in support of his contention referred to the self same decision of the Supreme court cited by Mr. Pal in the case of Tulsiram Patel (supra). In paragraphs 97 and 101 it was held therein that the Rules of natural justice are not Statutory rules and therefore yield to and change with the exigencies of different situations. The audi alterem partem rule cannot be. invoked if importing it would have the effect of paralysing the administrative process or where the need for promptitude or the urgency so demands. Mr. Roy at the same time contended that the provisions of the said Act provided for observance of the principles of natural justice at one stage by a Review Committee ac constituted under the Act. Subsection (4) of Section 15 of the said Act read with Sub Rule 8 of Rule 18 again stipulated for a decision by a Central Valuation Board in relation to the determination of annual valuation of any Review Committee. According to him the aforesaid provisions envisages a procedure for determination of annual valuation upon hearing which is in the nature of original hearing of the matter.
19. In the context of the aforesaid contentions it is not difficult to hold that this piece of legislation with its amendment by aforesaid Amendment Act of 1994 if read as a whole does not imply nor has the necessary intendment of exclusion of the principles of audi alterem partem rule altogether in the determination of annual valuation of any land or building. Rather it prescribes a review proceeding at the instance of the owner or occupier of a land or building.
20. In this connection it is necessary to look into the provisions of the said Act which provide for making of the valuation list. Relevant sections in this regard being 16, 17 and 189 as amended are reproduced hereunder:
Section 16. Owner or occupier to file statement : Every owner or occupier of any land or building shall file a statement before the Board in such manner and within such time and specifying such particulars as may be prescribed.
Section 17. Production and inspection of accounts and documents. The Board or any of its officer authorised by the Board may, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, require the owner or the occupier of any land or building to produce before the Board and such officer may fix, any accounts, registers or documents or to furnish any information relating thereto as may be considered necessary for the purpose of this Act and the owner or the occupier shall comply with such requisition.
Section 18. Power to enter into land or building : (1) Any officer of the Board, when so authorized by it in writing, may, without giving any previous notice to the owners, or the occupier, of any land or building, enter into such land or building and make an inspection or survey, or take measurements, thereof for the purpose of valuation.
(2) If such entry is refused or any objection to such entry is made, the officer under Sub-section (1) may give notice in writing to the owner or the occupier of such land or building of his intention to enter into such land or building, and the owner or the occupier of such land or building shall, upon such notice being duly served on him, extend all facilities as may reasonably be expected of him to such officer for entering into such land or building and for making inspection or survey, or for taking measurements, thereof, as the case may be, for the purpose of valuation.
Corresponding Rules are Rule 19, 20 and 21 of the said Rules, 1984 as amended in 1994. The same read as under:
Rule 19. Statement referred to in Section 16. (1) The statement referred to in Section 16 shall be in the Form as specified in Schedule III and shall contain the particulars referred to therein(provided that the Board may specify any of the particulars to be filed in by its office instead of being furnished by the person filing the statement).
(2) The statement shall be filed within thirty days from the date of publication by the Board of a notice in this behalf.
(3) The notice referred to in Sub-rule (2) shall be published in two newspapers of which one shall be vernacular.
Rule 20. Production of documents. Any accounts, registers or documents required to be produced u/s 17 or any information relating thereto as may be considered necessary by the Board for the purpose of the Act and which may be required to be furnished shall be produced or furnished within such time as the Board of the officer referred to in that section may fix and such accounts, registers or document may be retained by the Board for a period not exceeding one month against proper receipt.
Rule 21. Notice of entry. (1) Entry into any land or building for the purpose of inspection, conducting survey or taking measurement or for valuation shall be made only after giving the owner or occupier, as the case may be, not less then twenty four hours'' written notice of the intention to make such entry, where such written notice is required u/s 18.
21. Upon reading of the aforesaid provisions of the said Act of 1978 and the said Rules as amended it is clear that in making of the valuation of a land or building, the owner or occupier thereof has no participation and/or say except for filing of a statement as required u/s 16 of the said Act, read with Rule 19 of the said Rules. Furthermore, two important things emerge from the aforesaid provisions : the owner or occupier of any land or building has no scope to support his statement filed u/s 16 by production of any document and/or materials unless called for by the Board at its discretion as per the provisions of Section 17 of the said Act; that there is no scope for arriving at a conclusion in comparison with other similar properly and relevant factors in the absence of the owner or occupier of a land or building. Furthermore, the valuation list as prepared by the Board and produced in course of hearing also did not show any reason in support of the valuations noted against respective lands or buildings.
22. Again Chapter III of the West Bengal Central Valuation Board (Valuation of lands and buildings) Rules, 1984 dealt with the matters relating to review applications. In exercise of the power conferred by Section 28 of the said Act of 1978 by a notification No. 191/C-4/MIA-2/88 (pt.1) dated 30th March, 1994 the said Rules were amended. Rule 4 of the said Rules, which provided for publication of draft valuation list was amended to provide for publication of valuation list made u/s 11 of the said Act as amended. Similarly Rule 5 of the said Rules, which provided for publication of the notice of the preparation for publication of the notice of the preparation of the draft valuation list, was amended for publication of valuation list with the date within which the review application shall be filed in respect of such valuation. Rules 6 to 10 prescribing the mode the manner of filing objection against the draft valuation and determination of such objection upon hearing 1984 with the provisions for disposal of review applications in the manner as prescribed therein. For the present purpose Rules 11, 15 and 18 are relevant which are quoted hereunder:
Rule 11. Manner of filing application for review : (1) An application for review under Sub-section (1) of Section 14 shall be in writing and signed by person referred to therein.
(2) Every application should be neatly typed or written in a legible hand on only one side of paper of foolscap size leaving sufficient margin.
(3) The application shall briefly mention the grounds of objection to the valuation and each different ground shall be separately and consecutively numbered.
(4) Every application shall be in duplicate and shall be accompanied by a certified copy of the challan of receipt showing payment or deposit of the consolidated rate (or the property tax, as the case may be) as required under Sub-section (4) of Section 14.
(5) An application for review should ordinarily be sent by registered post with acknowledgement due or may be delivered personalty in which case a receipt shall be given to the person filing it.
Rule 15. Records. (1) All papers, documents, records, registers etc. relating to a review application shall remain in custody of the Corporation or the Municipality, as the case may be.
(2) The President may at any time call for such paper, register, record or document as he considers necessary for the disposal of any review application.
(3) If any requisition is made by the President to the Board under Sub-section (2) the Board shall comply expeditiously with it and give such assistance to the President as he may require in the discharge of his function.
Rule 18. Procedure for hearing of review application. (This Rule has been quoted hereinbefore).
23. Thus. Sections 14 and 15 of the said Act as amended read with the corresponding Rules as amended lay down a procedure for post decisional observance of the principles of natural justice in the determination of final annual valuation of a land or building, it is. therefore, necessary to consider whether such provisions for post decisional hearing provide for the observance of the principles of natural justice properly and fairly in the determination of annual valuation of a land or building so as to make the aforesaid Amendment Act and the said notification not vulnerable to Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
24. As observed by the Supreme Court in the decision repeated in AIR 1960 SC 468 [Mineral Development Ltd. vs. State of Bihar) that the test of reasonableness wherever prescribed, should be applied to each individual statute impugned and no abstract standard or general pattern of reasonableness can be laid down as application to all cases.
The nature of the right alleged to have been infringed, the underlying purpose of the restriction imposed, the extent and urgency of the edict sought to be remedied, the disproportion of the imposition, the prevailing conditions at the time, should all enter into the judicial verdict and it is the duty of the court to decide, having regard to those considerations and such others, wether a particular statute satisfies the objective test of reasonableness. It is now well established that except in case of direct legislative negation or implied exclusion of the principles of natural justice the requirement of natural justice is necessary for the purpose of procedural safeguards. The present Amendment Act though brought in a direct legislative negation of the principles of natural justice only at the initial stage of determination of annual valuation but by necessary intendment the same was not totally excluded in the process of final determination of annual valuation. By Sections 14 and 15 the observance of the principles of natural justice was provided by way of review proceeding. Therefore, necessary intendment being to determine finally the annual value of a land or building by following the principles of natural justice it is necessary to test as to whether the procedure prescribed for quasi-judicial determination of annual valuation under the provisions of the statute are fair, just and reasonable which are the components of fair treatment in a decision making process.
25. In support of the review application is therefore not efficacious and/or substantial inasmuch as the Review Committee itself has no authority to decide on the question of relevancy of a particular material, document and/or evidence in support of the review application. Thus, even if fence and/or material In support of the review application is refused by the President alone of the Review Committee, then also the Review Committee irrespective of such refusal will decide the review petition and such decision of the Review Committee will ultimately be a final decision of the committee which did not afford proper opportunity to the applicant to defend his review application and therefore would be a decision without observance of the principles of natural Justice in its terms. Accordingly, though the statute by no express words and necessary intendments excluded the principles of natural justice altogether in the determination of annual valuation but the procedure prescribed therein does not envisage a situation for the observance of the said principles in its fullest amplitude. Thus, the procedure for hearing of a review application as envisaged in Rule 18 of the said Rules, does not, as observed hereinbefore, provide for a hearing of a nature which satisfy the requirement of the principles of natural justice. Rather it prescribes a restricted hearing for the purpose of review of the valuation determined absolutely without any opportunity of hearing. It is therefore a case of glaring instance where the principles of natural justice was not adhered to in the determination of annual valuation at the initial stage, but also is not to be observed at the stage of review in the manner which it should have been observed at the initial stage of determination.
26. In this connection reference may be made to the decision of the Supreme Court reported in (1986) 4SCC 537 (Institute of Chartered Accountants of India vs. L K. Ratna) and cited Mr. Pal. It was held therein that the principles of natural justice must be read into the unoccupied interstices of the Statute unless there is a clear mandate to the contrary. In paragraph 17 of the said report it further quoted with approval a passage from -Administrative Law" 5th edition by Sir William Wade which is as under:
If natural justice is violated at the first stage, the right of appeal is not so much a true right of appeal as a corrected initial hearing; instead of fair trial followed by appeal, the procedure is reduced to unfair trial followed by fair trial.
27. As stated hereinbefore Sub-section (2) of Section 15 provided for a Review Committee presided over by the Chairman or Vice-chairman of a Municipality, two other members being the Councillors of a Municipality as may be nominated by the Board of Councillors of such Municipality and a member who shall be an officer of the Valuation Board having knowledge in the assessment of municipal valuation deputed by the Board. Thus, except for the member deputed by the Valuation Board none has the knowledge and/or experience in the assessment of municipal valuation. Third proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 15 provided that the decision of a Review Committee shall be unanimous and sub-section (4) of Section 15 provided that if there is any difference of opinion amongst the members of the Review Committee the matter shall be referred to the Valuation Board for decision. Thus, as per aforesaid provisions, in the disposal of a review application if there be any difference of opinion amongst the members of a Review Committee the said review application shall be remanded back to the Valuation Board itself which determined the annual valuation against which such review application was made. Sub-section 5 of Section 15 provided that such decision of the review Committee and/or the Board. as the case may be, shall be final. Therefore, in case of a difference of opinion the decision of the Board which made the initial determination of annual valuation shall be final even review application. Most strikingly the aforesaid provisions do not spell out a space for representation by the owner or occupier of a land or building in support of his review application before the Valuation Board whose decision will be binding on him. In such a situation an owner or occupier of any land or building will be left in the lurch. Such owner or occupier may in such situation legitimately entertain an apprehension that the valuation made by the valuation Board will be maintained.
28. Again Rule 18 of the said Rules provided for the procedure for hearing of a review application before the Review Committee. The procedure prescribed therein empowered the President alone to refuse or to allow production of any evidence and /or material in support of the review application by the applicant. Therefore, a party applying for a review cannot as of right lead evidence in support of his review application. The hearing of the review application which is for the observance of the principles of natural justice and which includes the right to defend in all possible manner by production of necessary evidence and/or materials Same view was expressed by the Supreme Court in the decision reported in AIR 1984 SC J271 (Board Oil Mills vs. Union of India). It held therein that the procedure maybe different in each and may be determined by the facts, circumstances and exigencies of each case. The authority may design it''s own procedure to suit the requirements of an individual case. The procedure must be fair and not so designed as to defeat well known principles of justice and thus deny justice. If the procedure is fair it matters not whether the investigation is proceeded, interjected or succeeded by a show cause notice. In the case in hand though it could be said that initial investigation of annual valuation is not to be necessarily interjected by an opportunity of hearing to the owner or occupier of any land or building "but the procedure prescribed for post decisional hearing is in direct conflict with the fair procedure for observance of the principles of natural justice in it''s fallest sence of application. Thus, in substance unilateral determination of annual valuation without following the principles of natural justice whatsoever is sought to be followed up by final determination of the same upon pretended observance of the principles of natural justice in the form of a review application. This is therefore a case where no trial is to be followed by an unfair trial.
29. Furthermore, the determination of annual valuation as observed hereinbefore is a quasi-judicial function. Such valuation is required to be determined under the said Act, 1978 be it prior to it''s amendment or alter, upon consideration of several factors such as the nature and character of the property and the reasonable rent at which it is expected to let. Such determination of annual valuation on the basis of the reasonable rent at which the premises expected to let is not to be upon exercise of an infettered and unguided power by the authority concerned. Whenever there is a reference of the word "reasonable" be it rent or otherwise determination of such must necessarily be supported with reasons. Otherwise the determination cannot be termed as reasonable but an arbitrary determination. Because such determination thought undoubtedly leave a certain amount of discretion to the authority concerned yet it must follow a standard form and a norm and therefore the authority concerned must act within the boundary and not arbitrarily and according to it''s whims and caprice. If the relevant provisions of law granted a right of review against the unilateral determination of an annual valuation by way of observance of the principles of natural justice it therefore necessarily implied that the aggrieved party must have an opportunity to convince the Review Committee that the determination so made was erroneous. Such opportunity would be illusory in the absence of any reasons in support of such unilateral determination in the initial stage. In this connection reference may be made to the decision of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1970 SC 1302 (Mahabir Prasad Santosh Kumar vs. State of U.P.). In last part of paragraph 7 of the said report it was held as under:
If the order is subject to appeal, the necessity to record reasons is greater, for without recorded reasons the appellate authority has no material on which it may determine whether the facts were properly ascertained, the relevant law was correctly applied and the decision was just.
30. At the risk of repetition I may refer to the decision reported in AIR 1995 Cal 26 (Surendra Enterprise Pvt. Ltd. vs. Municipal Corporation). It was also held therein that if there is a duty to make an assessment in accordance with law it implies that such shall be carried out by following the principles of natural justice as well as by giving reasons. It is not merely an administrative order whereby the assessment is made, it is a quasi-judicial order inasmuch as the effect of such order may adversely affect the right of a citizen regarding the enjoyment of a property and accordingly, it is incumbent upon the respondents to decide the question by giving reasons so that the petitioners could have challenged the decision before the appellate authority or before this court, as the case may be. On this ground alone the impugned assessment of valuation was set aside by this court in the said decision.
31. In the case in hand the valuation list as prepared under the amended provisions of the said Act, 1978 was produced in course of hearing by the petitioners. Contents of such valuation list were not disputed by the respondents. The said list beside mentioning the particular valuation against particular land or building did not disclose the reasons and/or grounds upon which such valuation was arrived at. Nor it could be ascertained therefrom which of the standards or norms was followed by the authority concerned in arriving at different valuation for different premises though situated in a same locality and more or less from to the same standard. On that score also the caluations thus determined by the Central Valuation Board are not sustainable in law.
32. That further in view of the statements, made in the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the West Bengal Central Valuation Board, that at it''s behest casual employees were recruited by the Municipality who made the door to door survey of the properties situated within the area of Bidhan Nagar Municipality and collected respective datas of the concerned premises in a field book from which an inspection book was prepared on the basis of which valuations were determined by the Board. It is also necessary to consider whether such action is permissible under the provisions of the said Act. First proviso to said Section 9 provided that the Board may in accordance with the resolution in this behalf adopted at a meeting of the Board and with the previous approval of the State Government require a Valuer Surveyor grade I or Valuer Surveyor grade II to make, subject to such condition, as maybe prescribed, the general valuation of lands and buildings in the area specified by notification or any part thereof under the superintendence, direction and control of the Board on payment of such remuneration as the Board may determine, and every such valuation shall be deemed to have been, made by the Board. Section 11 as amended and quoted hereinbefore provided that Board will prepare a valuation list of general valuation of lands and buildings so made by the Board u/s 9 of the said Act which shall also include the amount of consolidated rate thereof. Such valuation shall be conclusive subject to review as aforesaid. Section 18 as quoted hereinbefore empowered the officer of the Board to enter into any land and building for inspection, survey and for measurement for the purpose of making such valuation.
33. Provisions of Sections 6, 7 and 26 further provided as under :
Section 6. Officers and other staff.
(3) The Board may create such posts of others officers and employees as may be approved by the State Government :
Provided that Board shall not without the previous approval of the State Government appoint any officer in the scale of pay, the maximum of which exceeds one thousand five hundred rupees a month.
(4) The terms and conditions of service, including salaries and allowances, of the officers and employees appointed under Subsection (3) shall be determined by regulations.
Section 7. Employment of staff of the State Government, -
(1) The Board may take over and employ such staff of the State Government as the State Government may make available.
(2) During the period of such employment all matters relating to pay, allowances, leave, retirement, pension, provident fund and all other terms and conditions of service of the staff so made available and taken over shall be regulated by the West Bengal Service Rules or such other rules on the subject as may, from time to time, be made by the State Government for its employees.
(3) Subject to the provisions of Sub-sections (2) and (4) every person so taken over and employed shall be subject to the provisions of this Act and the regulations.
(4) All permanent Government employees taken over and employed under Sub-section (1) shall have a lien on their post in the service of the State Government and the period of their service under the Board shall, on reversion to the service of the State Government, be counted for the purpose of their promotion, increments, pensions and other matters relating to their service.
Section 26. Employment of staff. - The Board may employ such members of the staff (of the Corporation or the Municipality or any other local authority, as the case may be) having jurisdiction over the area specified in the notification, under Sub-section (1) of Section 9 on such terms and conditions of service as may be determined by regulation:
Provided that the terms and conditions of service of the persons so employed shall not be varied to their disadvantage.
Bare reading of the aforesaid provisions gives impression that (i) the Board if empowered by notification to make the general valuation of lands and buildings in the area specified then such determination shall be made by the Board only; (ii) for such purpose the Board may in accordance with it''s resolution and with prior approval of the State Government require the services of valuer surveyors Grade I and Grade II registered with the Board having qualifications as prescribed and as defined in the said Act; (ill) there is no scope for employment of any personnel by the Board other than as are enunciated in the aforesaid provisions for the purpose of determination of annual valuation of lands and buildings.
34. The Board being a creature of the statute and having been vested with the power to make general valuation of lands and buildings as per the notification issued by the State Government in this behalf must necessarily act within the four comers of the statute. Both the constitution of the Board and the provisions for employment of officers, employees and staff have been prescribed under the statute. Therefore, under the provisions of the said Act there is no scope for making any casual employment by the Board far less to speak of determination of general valuation of lands and buildings by such casual employees. This is also apparent from the provisions of Section 18 of the said Act which clearly stipulates that an officer of the Board alone when so authorised by the Board in writing, may enter into the lands and buildings for the purpose of annual general valuation and no other person other than the officers of the Board have been authorised with such entry. It is also not the case of the respondent Board that any valuer surveyor of either grade I or grade II was employed for the purpose of preparation of general valuation list.
35. Thus, it cannot be conceived that the casual employees of the respondent/Municipality having no access to the lands and buildings for the purpose of inspection in relation to the determination of annual valuation of lands and buildings could supply information and particulars as are required under the statute or if supplied could form the basis under the statute for the purpose of determination of general valuation of lands and buildings in the area so specified in the notification by the State Government.
36. That apart it has been specifically stated in the affidavit-in-opposition by the respondent/Valuation Board that such casual employees recorded all necessary dates relating to a land or building in a rough book which was in the nature of a field book from which the dates so collected were transferred to an Inspection Book containing fair and final copy of the report based on such dates. Such final reports were placed before the Central Valuation Board which determined the valuation. Copies of field and Inspection Books of some of the premises have been annexed to the affidavit-in-opposition. Bare perusal of the same reveals that in some cases relevant particulars are missing from the respective field and Inspection Books. It thereby leaves an impression that valuations were made in a slipshod manner and that too purely on the basis of the particulars recorded in the field book by such casual employees and not by the independent enquiry and application of mind to the facts and circumstances of each particular case by any officer, employee or staff of the Board, The Division Bench of this court in it''s decision in the case of (P. K. Mondal vs. Krishnagar Municipality, reported in 82 CWN 457, held that nonfulfillment of mandatory requirements of the statute in the determination of annual valuation list which alone ensures preparation of valuation list in a bonafide manner and in accordance with law. renders the very assessment ultra vires as a whole, and where there had been assessment in the true sense of the term or where the assessment as a whole is ultra vires remedy contemplated by way of review is no remedy.
37. All the aforesaid findings lead to the only conclusion that Sections 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9(a) of the West Bengal Central Valuation Board (Amendment) Act, 1994 and the notification No. 191/C-4/MIA-2/88 (Pt.1) dated 30th March, 1994 issued in exercise of power conferred by Section 28 of the West Bengal Central Valuation Board Act, 1978 amending the West Bengal Central Valuation Board (Valuation of Lands and Buildings) Rules, 1984 are ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India and are hereby declared as such.
Since the aforesaid provisions of the West Bengal Central Valuation Board (Amendment) Act, 1994 and the said notification dated 30th March, 1994 amending the West Bengal Central Valuation Board (Valuation of Lands and Buildings) Rules, 1984 are hereby declared as ultra vires the Constitution of India so the general valuation lists prepared in respect of the area of the Bidhannagar Municipality as specified in the notification issued by the State Government, in compliance thereof shall stand cancelled.
38. These writ petitions are accordingly allowed.
39. Prayer on behalf of the respondents for stay of operation of this judgment is refused. If urgent xerox certified copy of this order is applied for, by the parties, the same should be given as expeditiously as possible.
