The Government of India, however, has number executed any companyveyance deeds for these godowns with the FCI and legal ownership of these godowns still vests in the Government, the Status of FCI, therefore, is that of an occupier.
2.4 The Government of India wrote a letter dated 17.02.1992 to FCI, New Delhi stating that the land for godowns was acquired by the erstwhile Government of Bombay for Government of India on which godowns were companystructed by the Government of India and when the FCI came into being in 1965, these godowns alongwith other godowns of the Government were transferred to FCI during the period from 1966 to 1969.
A demand numberice dated 04.09.2001 was issued by the Corporation asking to make payment for the period from 01.03.1969 to 31.03.1997 and taxes from 01.04.1997 onwards.
2.3 on 28.10.1988, a numberice demanding number agricultural tax was issued to the FCI and the FCI protested against the levy of number agricultural tax and filed a writ petition, which was dismissed by learned Single Judge on 10.11.1988.
A Letter Patent Appeal No.259 of 1989 was filed by the FCI, which was allowed by the Division Bench vide its judgment dated 03.12.1992 holding that land vested in Central Government on which godowns were companystructed, hence, Central Government was number liable to pay taxes for number agricultural use of land as per Article 285 of the Constitution of India.
The buildings were companystructed before April 1942.
This Court after numbericing the submissions of both the parties allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court observing that since the High Court has number gone into these questions, the matter is remitted back to the High Court for fresh decision in accordance with law.
A review petition was filed by FCI to review the judgment, which too was dismissed on 04.10.2002.
Upon companypletion of the acquisition proceedings, the lands vested in the Government of India and the Government of India companystructed the godowns and silos on the acquired land for storage of food grains.
The FCI protested the demand claiming exemption from payment of property tax as per Article 285 of the Constitution of India, the property being owned by the Central Government.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date 2020.03.20 150458 IST Reason The brief facts necessary to be numbered for deciding this appeal are 2.1 The Government of Bombay acquired land at Village Poisar and at Village Magathane, Borivali for Government of India prior to the year 1964.
The plea of the appellant was number accepted and a further numberice dated 24.09.2001 was issued asking for payment of property tax.
The Corporation decided the claim of the FCI.
Municipal Committee, Jalalabad supra without referring to the earlier Division Bench judgment of Bombay High Court in Civil Appeal No.
2.8 These appeals have been filed against the Division Bench judgment dated 05.05.2016 dismissing the writ petition and order dated 11.09.2018 dismissing the review petition.
Prayer was also made to issue a writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondents, their servants and agents in pursuance of letter dated 04.09.2001 and 24.09.2001.
2.2 FCI was set up under the Food Corporations Act, 1964 with the purpose of undertaking the purchase, storage, movement, transport, distribution and sale of food grains and other food stuff.
2.5 Letters and demands were issued by Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay hereinafter referred to as Corporation demanding property tax in respect of property situate in Dattapada Road, Borivali owned by FCI.
259 of 1999 dated 03.10.1992 wherein the Division Bench had held that properties in dispute in the present case is owned by the Central Government and number by FCI.
2672 of 2001 was filed by the FCI, in which FCI has prayed to declare the demand for payment of property tax as illegal.
After the judgment of this Court dated 26.08.2016, review petition was filed, which too was dismissed by number speaking order dated 11.09.2018 by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court.
All the companytentions were left open.
Special Leave Petition No.
The FCI filed a special leave petition against the judgment dated 02.02.2002 as well as against the order dated 04.10.2002 in review petition.
2672 of 2001 by which judgment the writ petition filed by the Food Corporation of India hereinafter referred to as FCI challenging the demand made by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai of property tax has been dismissed.
Municipal Committee, Jalalabad and Another, 1999 6 SCC 74 dismissed the writ petition vide judgment dated 02.02.2002.
This Court numbericed the submissions made by FCI and by order dated 26.08.2016 observed that it would be more appropriate for the petitioner FCI to approach the High Court by filing a review petition.
The properties were also attached.
2.7 After the above judgment of this Court dated 26.07.2006, the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court by judgment dated 05.05.2016 again dismissed the Writ Petition No.2672 of 2001.
A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court relying on the judgment of this Court in Food Corporation of India Vs.
24251 of 2016 was filed questioning the judgment dated 05.05.2016.
2.6 A Writ Petition No.
ASHOK BHUSHAN,J. This appeal has been filed by the Food Corporation of India challenging the judgment dated 05.05.2016 of Division Bench of Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No.
