Madras High Court
WP(MD)/28937/2026 of Ponmudi Vs The Assistant Commissioner on 14 October 2026
WP(MD) Nos. 28937 and 29767of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 14-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR
RAMAMOORTHY
WP(MD) Nos. 28937 and
29767 of 2026
and
WMP (MD) Nos.21933 and 22638 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011424752026}
Ponmudi
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
The Assistant Commissioner,
Zonal-I East,
Madurai Corporation,
Madurai.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of CERTIORARI, calling for records in Demand notice dated 07.08.2026 on the file of the respondent and quash the same as illegal and pass such other orders as deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
WP(MD) No.29767 of 2026
P.Yamini
D/o.Ponmudi,
No.3/404, Peter Church Road, Ayyer Bungalow, Madurai-14.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
Zonal-I East, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.
__________
( Uploaded on: 14/10/2026 08:43:23 pm )
WP(MD) Nos. 28937 and 29767of 2026
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for records in Demand notice dated 07.08.2026 on the file of the respondent and quash the same as illegal and pass such other orders as deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice For Petitioner(s):
M/s S. Kumar (both petitions)
For Respondent(s):
Mr.F.Deepak (both petitions)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
COMMON ORDER
The petitioner in each petition had applied for mutation of the property tax assessment in his/her name. Upon receipt of demand notices claiming property tax at an enhanced rate retrospectively, these writ petitions were filed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that property tax was paid at the pre-enhanced rate up to 2025–26. He submits further that these demand notices were not preceded by assessments.
3. Accepting notice for the respondent, Mr.F.Deepak, learned Standing Counsel, submits that additional construction was put up in the __________
( Uploaded on: 14/10/2026 08:43:23 pm )
WP(MD) Nos. 28937 and 29767of 2026 two properties and that property tax was enhanced as a result thereof after inspecting the premises.
4. There is no evidence of the demand notices being preceded by an assessment in terms of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, read with the rules framed thereunder. Therefore, the impugned demand notices cannot be sustained and are hereby set aside. As a consequence, these matters are remanded for reconsideration. Fresh assessments shall be undertaken in compliance with the statute and rules and completed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. Accordingly, these writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 14-10-2026 PKN __________
( Uploaded on: 14/10/2026 08:43:23 pm )
WP(MD) Nos. 28937 and 29767of 2026 To The Assistant Commissioner, Zonal-I East, Madurai Corporation, Madurai. __________
( Uploaded on: 14/10/2026 08:43:23 pm )
WP(MD) Nos. 28937 and 29767of 2026 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. PKN WP(MD) No. 28937 of 2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 14/10/2026 08:43:23 pm )
WP(MD) Nos. 28937 and 29767of 2026 14-10-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 14/10/2026 08:43:23 pm )