ORDER BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT- MR. P.K. PADHI:
JUDGMENT
Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.35 of C.P. Act, 2019 seeking following reliefs;
“Direct the opposite party not to realize the arrear holding tax from the complainant till the same is revised and not to take any action against the complainant for realizes the arrear holding tax against holding No.222 Ward No.3 of Jagatsinghpur Municipality”.
The brief fact of the case is that, the complainant being an inhabitant of the village Markandapur under Jagatsinghpur Municipality he is regularly paying the holding tax to the Municipality till 2014-15. The opposite party increased the holding tax without verifying the status of the complainant, so the complainant put forth his grievance before the opposite party to revise the holding tax imposed against him but the opposite party remained silent about it. All on a sudden the opposite party issued a demand notice on 15.3.2021 demanding payment of a huge amount of Rs.3,35,602/- and forced the complainant for payment of such arrear holding tax within 15 days and threatened to attach and sale the immovable property of the complainant.
Opposite party filed written version stating as under;
According to the Municipal Act and Rules, the opposite party after due verification of the status of the building of the complainant imposed the holding tax upon the complainant and at no point of time the opposite party imposed the higher side holding tax upon the complainant. When the complainant fails to pay the holding tax before the opposite party, considering the duties and responsibilities, the opposite party sent notice after notice upon the complainant for payment of outstanding dues lying upon the complainant is not be treated as threaten to the complainant by the opposite party. Rather the opposite party discharged his duties as a responsible government servant.
The dispute relates to excess imposition of holding tax by opposite party.
No consideration is being paid by the complainant for which complainant cannot be termed as a consumer as defined under section 2(7) of Consumer Protection Act.
There is provision of appeal against the excess imposition of holding tax before appropriate authority under Odisha Municipality Act.
In view of the facts stated above we find no merit in the case and dismiss the consumer complaint being not maintainable. However liberty is given to complainant to approach appropriate authority. Accordingly the consumer complaint is disposed of. No cost.
Pronounced in the open Commission on this 21st July,2023.
