VIVEK MADHAVLAL PITTIEversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI

                                                                                          17-wp-3579-26.doc

  INGALE

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
           Digitally
           signed by
                                 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
           URMILA
URMILA     PRAMOD
PRAMOD     INGALE
           Date:
INGALE     2026.09.18
           10:29:08
           +0530                         WRIT PETITION NO. 3579 OF 2026

                        Vivek Madhavlal Pittie                               ...Petitioner
                             Versus
                        Municipal Corporation of
                        Greater Mumbai and ors.                             ...Respondents
                                                               ...
                        Mr. Bhushan Deshmukh a/w Mr. Arun Unnikrishnan,
                        Ms.Ishani Saxena and Ms. Pooja Bhagat i/b Jadeja & Satiya,
                        for the Petitioner.
                        Ms. Sheetal Metakari, the Respondents.
                                                              ...

                                         CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ.
                                              & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.

                                            DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER, 2026


                        P.C.:
                        1.            The    instant    petition     is   preferred    seeking       the

                        following substantive reliefs.

                                (a) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or
                                any other writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari under
                                Article 226 of the Constitution calling for the records and
                                proceedings pertaining to Impugned Property Tax Bills (Exhibit "Z-
                                1" to "Z-16" hereto) issued by Respondent No.1 for the period from
                                1st April 2010 to 31st March 2026 and after examining the legality,
                                validity and propriety thereof, the same be quashed and set aside;

                                (b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
                                or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
                                under Article 226 of the Constitution directing the Respondents to
                                carry out fresh reassessment of the said Property on the basis of
                                the directions passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter



                                                               1
                                                               17-wp-3579-26.doc


      of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. vs. Property
      Owners Association & Ors. reported in [2022] 14 S.C.R. 679;

      (c) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass an order restraining
      the Respondents from issuing any fresh property tax bills and/or
      levying any fresh property taxes in respect of the said Property
      until fresh reassessment of the capital value of the said Property
      from the year 2012 is carried out in view of the judgment passed
      by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Municipal
      Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. vs. Property Owners
      Association & Ors. reported in [2022] 14 S.C.R. 679 and
      consequently, bills for the period 01 April 2010 to 31 March 2012
      are also duly corrected;

      (d) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass an order directing
      the Respondents to refund the excess property tax paid by the
      Petitioner amounting to Rs. 89,10,212/-(as per Exhibit "AA"
      hereto) along with statutory interest to the Petitioner.”



2.          At the outset, Mr. Bhushan Deshmukh, learned

counsel for the Petitioner placed on record the Notification

dated 15/04/2026 issued by the Government of Maharashtra

under Maharashtra Act No. XXI of 2026. He submits that

during    the    pendency      of   the    instant    proceedings,        the

Notification was already issued on 15/04/2026 and would

press the reliefs, in the light of the provisions under Clause

5(2)(b) of Notification. For ready reference, Clause 5 of the said

Notification is reproduced hereunder :

     “5. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the principal Act or
     rules made thereunder or any judgment, decree or order of any
     court, any property tax on capital value of land or building or part
     thereof or penalty assessed, levied, demanded, collected or reviewed
     by the Corporation or any of its officers or authorities; or any action
     taken or things done or purported to have been taken or done for


                                     2
                                                        17-wp-3579-26.doc


assessing, levying, demanding, collecting or reviewing such property
tax or penalty by the Corporation under the provisions of the
principal Act, and the Capital Value Rules, 2010 and the Capital
Value Rules, 2015 made thereunder, during the period commencing
on the 1st April 2010 and ending on the date of commencement of
the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (Amendment, Re-enactment of
Capital Value Rules and Validation) Act, 2026 (hereinafter in this
section referred to as "the Amendment Act"), shall be deemed to be
and shall be deemed always to have been, duly and validly taken or
done in accordance with the law as if the provisions of sub- sections
(1A) and (1B) of section 154 of the principal Act and the said Rules,
as amended by the Amendment Act, had been continuously in force
at all material times and accordingly,-
    (a) all actions taken or proceedings or things done by the
    Corporation or any of its officers or authorities in connection
    with assessment, levy, demand, collection or review of such
    property tax or penalty shall for all the purposes, be deemed to
    be and shall be deemed always to have been done or taken in
    accordance with the provisions of the principal Act and rules
    made thereunder;


    (b) no suit or appeal or other proceedings shall lie or be
    maintainable or continued in any court or before any officer or
    authorities against the Corporation or any of its officers or
    authorities for the refund of any property taxes so levied and
    collected;
    (c) no court or any other authority shall enforce any decree or
    order directing the refund of any property taxes so levied and
    collected;
    d) any amount of property tax levied and collected in excess
    amount of property tax, if any, paid shall not be refunded and
    shall be adjusted against the amount of property tax due under
    the principal Act.
2) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that nothing in
sub-section (1) shall be construed as preventing person,-
    (a) from questioning in accordance with the provisions of the
    principal Act and the rules framed thereunder, as amended by
    the Amendment Act, assessment, levy, demand, collection or
    review of property tax or penalty referred to in sub-section (1);
    (b) from claiming refund of any property tax paid by him in
    excess of the amount due from him by way of property tax
    under the principal Act as amended by the Amendment Act;”




                               3
                                                      17-wp-3579-26.doc


3.         The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that

the Respondents be directed to proceed strictly in consonance

with the Notification issued under the Maharashtra Act No.

XXI of 2026 which was gazetted in Maharashtra Government

Gazette on 15/04/2026. Be that as it may.


4.         The    Respondents    are   accordingly   directed      to

reprocess/reassess the claim set up by the Petitioner in the

light of the Notification issued under the said Notification

gazetted   in    the   Maharashtra     Government    Gazette      on

15/04/2026. This order has been passed with the assistance

of learned counsel for the Respondents- Ms. Metakari.



4.   Needless to state that in case, the Petitioner is aggrieved

with the reassessment, then the Petitioner is at liberty to

invoke appropriate proceedings in accordance with law within

a period of three months. We clarify that we have not adverted

on the merits of the matter, which are left over.


5.   The Writ Petition is Disposed of in the above terms.




[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]                        [CHIEF JUSTICE]


                                4