Advertisement
High Court raps BMC for ‘unjustifiable’ lateness
| Anamika Gharat anamika.gharat@timesofindia.com | Dec 12, 2025, 04:00 IST
The Bombay High Court has dismissed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s (BMC) appeal in a property tax dispute, criticising the civic body for an “unexplained and unjustifiable” delay of more than four years. The Court said the case could not proceed when the statutory 30-day limitation had long expired.The dispute stemmed from a 2016 Court of Small Causes order that reduced the Rateable Value (RV) – a property’s estimated annual rental income if let on the open market, for a property owned by Ashirwad Shelters Pvt Ltd, from the BMC’s original assessment of Rs 1.42 crore to Rs 7.40 lakh. The civic body sought to challenge this ruling but failed to act within time. Justice Jitendra Jain held that the country’s richest municipal corporation could not rely on staff shortages, internal failures or the COVID-19 pandemic to justify its inaction.Justice Jain noted that rateable value assessments play a crucial role in municipal revenue and demanded “speed and seriousness” in handling such matters. Instead, the BMC’s internal Appeal Committee met four times between August 2016 and April 2017, all after the limitation period had ended. It approved filing an appeal only in June 2017, and the decision reached the legal department in November 2018 – a further 17-month gap. The appeal was ultimately filed in October 2020.The judge said he “failed to understand” why a routine revenue issue required years of movement across departments. Commonly cited reasons such as manpower shortages, workload pressure and staff changes were dismissed as excuses. The Court said a financially strong civic body was expected to maintain adequate legal resources and infrastructure. The argument that the pandemic caused the delay was rejected outright, as the limitation had expired in 2016.Relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shivamma vs Karnataka Housing Board (KHB), the HC said the BMC had shown no “sufficient cause”. With the delayed application rejected, the appeal and a connected stay plea were dismissed, ending the dispute in favour of the respondent.Shivamma vs KHB is a landmark 2025 SC case where the court denied condoning KHB’s more than 11-year delay (3966 days) in filing an appeal, establishing that administrative laxity isn’t “sufficient cause.” The case originated from a land dispute where KHB took Shivamma’s land for housing but failed to pay the compensation ordered by the courts, leading to execution proceedings and KHB’s delayed appeal
The Bombay High Court has dismissed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s (BMC) appeal in a property tax dispute, criticising the civic body for an “unexplained and unjustifiable” delay of more than four years. The Court said the case could not proceed when the statutory 30-day limitation had long expired.
The dispute stemmed from a 2016 Court of Small Causes order that reduced the Rateable Value (RV) – a property’s estimated annual rental income if let on the open market, for a property owned by Ashirwad Shelters Pvt Ltd, from the BMC’s original assessment of Rs 1.42 crore to Rs 7.40 lakh. The civic body sought to challenge this ruling but failed to act within time. Justice Jitendra Jain held that the country’s richest municipal corporation could not rely on staff shortages, internal failures or the COVID-19 pandemic to justify its inaction.
Justice Jain noted that rateable value assessments play a crucial role in municipal revenue and demanded “speed and seriousness” in handling such matters. Instead, the BMC’s internal Appeal Committee met four times between August 2016 and April 2017, all after the limitation period had ended. It approved filing an appeal only in June 2017, and the decision reached the legal department in November 2018 – a further 17-month gap. The appeal was ultimately filed in October 2020.
The judge said he “failed to understand” why a routine revenue issue required years of movement across departments. Commonly cited reasons such as manpower shortages, workload pressure and staff changes were dismissed as excuses. The Court said a financially strong civic body was expected to maintain adequate legal resources and infrastructure. The argument that the pandemic caused the delay was rejected outright, as the limitation had expired in 2016.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shivamma vs Karnataka Housing Board (KHB), the HC said the BMC had shown no “sufficient cause”. With the delayed application rejected, the appeal and a connected stay plea were dismissed, ending the dispute in favour of the respondent.
Shivamma vs KHB is a landmark 2025 SC case where the court denied condoning KHB’s more than 11-year delay (3966 days) in filing an appeal, establishing that administrative laxity isn’t “sufficient cause.” The case originated from a land dispute where KHB took Shivamma’s land for housing but failed to pay the compensation ordered by the courts, leading to execution proceedings and KHB’s delayed appeal
The dispute stemmed from a 2016 Court of Small Causes order that reduced the Rateable Value (RV) – a property’s estimated annual rental income if let on the open market, for a property owned by Ashirwad Shelters Pvt Ltd, from the BMC’s original assessment of Rs 1.42 crore to Rs 7.40 lakh. The civic body sought to challenge this ruling but failed to act within time. Justice Jitendra Jain held that the country’s richest municipal corporation could not rely on staff shortages, internal failures or the COVID-19 pandemic to justify its inaction.
Justice Jain noted that rateable value assessments play a crucial role in municipal revenue and demanded “speed and seriousness” in handling such matters. Instead, the BMC’s internal Appeal Committee met four times between August 2016 and April 2017, all after the limitation period had ended. It approved filing an appeal only in June 2017, and the decision reached the legal department in November 2018 – a further 17-month gap. The appeal was ultimately filed in October 2020.
The judge said he “failed to understand” why a routine revenue issue required years of movement across departments. Commonly cited reasons such as manpower shortages, workload pressure and staff changes were dismissed as excuses. The Court said a financially strong civic body was expected to maintain adequate legal resources and infrastructure. The argument that the pandemic caused the delay was rejected outright, as the limitation had expired in 2016.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shivamma vs Karnataka Housing Board (KHB), the HC said the BMC had shown no “sufficient cause”. With the delayed application rejected, the appeal and a connected stay plea were dismissed, ending the dispute in favour of the respondent.
Shivamma vs KHB is a landmark 2025 SC case where the court denied condoning KHB’s more than 11-year delay (3966 days) in filing an appeal, establishing that administrative laxity isn’t “sufficient cause.” The case originated from a land dispute where KHB took Shivamma’s land for housing but failed to pay the compensation ordered by the courts, leading to execution proceedings and KHB’s delayed appeal
Advertisement
