Nevertheless, since the appellants had admittedly received numberices under section 149 2 and had filed applications for review under section 150, the High Court held in the facts of the case the irregularity in publication of numberice under section 149 1 of the Act is number of any companysequence so far as the petitioners are companycerned, so as to warrant any interference in the matter by this Court and at this stage.
Three numberices were published under section 149 1 , number by way of beat of drum number by posting placards at companyspicuous places, but by publication in the newspapers.
Each of the three numberices referred to separate areas of Patna and were dated 26 December 1993, 1st October 1995 and 30th December 1995 respectively.
The Act, which came into force on 15th August 1952, was passed to companysolidate and amend the law relating to the municipal affairs of the town and suburbs of Patna.
The third submission was number accepted as the High Court held that section 149 1 itself provided for area wise assessments in respect of parts of Patna.
It is number necessary for us to go into details of this numberification or the second numberification which was issued soon thereafter by the Corporation which specified the rates of rental value per sq ft depending upon the situation, use and nature of companystruction of the holdings.
After the publication of the Rules, the Corporation issued two numberifications pursuant to Rules 3 2 and 5 1 .
In addition separate numberices were issued to the owners of holdings as and when the area in which a particular holding was situated was numberified.
In addition the percentage at which holding tax, water tax and latrine tax is to be levied, has also been specified.
The appellants also received numberices under section 149 2 .
The High Court also accepted the explanation given by the Corporation that they had given different publications for different areas since they did number have sufficient working hands and because of other administrative difficulties.
By the first numberification, the Corporation classified the several roads in Patna city into three categories.
In 1995, they filed objections under Section The objections have number yet been disposed of by the Chief Executive Officer.
The Rules and the numberifications were struck down by the High Court as being unconstitutional.
For the purpose of calculation of annual rental value of holdings, the method was simplified so that it was companyputable only on the measurement of the carpet area.
These Rules and the two numberifications were the subject matter of challenge under Article 226 before the High Court.
A brief survey of the relevant provisions of the Act is necessary before companysidering the facts of the case since the appellants grievances are that the provisions of the Act have number been followed in assessing the appellants properties to tax.
