http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  1083-1084 of 2000

PETITIONER: Agastyar Trust

RESPONDENT: Commissioner & Secretary to Government Revenue Department & Anr.

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15/03/2005

BENCH: S.N. Variava, Dr. AR. Lakshmanan & S.H. Kapadia

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, J.

       These appeals were filed by the appellant-Trust against the final  judgment and order dated 30.7.1999 passed by the High Court of Judicature at  Madras in Writ Appeal No. 1190 of 1999 and C.M.P. No. 11716 of 1999  whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant against  the order of the learned single Judge of the High Court in Writ Petition No.  14745 of 1988 and W.M.P.No.22080 of 1988 denying the appellant exemption  from paying urban land tax.  The short facts are as follows:         The instant case relates to the exemption of the land held by the  appellant for the period 1965 to 1976 from the payment of urban land tax under  the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Tax Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as "the  Act").  The appellant-Trust was established under a trust deed with charitable  objects in the year 1941.  By a deed, the appellant-Trust declared and affirmed  to be a public trust with charitable or religious objects.  The State of Tamil  Nadu issued G.Os being G.O.Ms. No. 1947 dated 17.9.1976, 2056 dated  4.10.1976 and 2625 dated 27.12.1976 respectively declaring the norms for  exemption from the payment of Urban Land Tax under the Act.  The said G.O.  stipulated that all institutions recognized as charitable institutions under the  Indian Income Tax Act will be dealt as such under the Act.  It is also stipulated  that exception is to be given if the income is used solely for the objectives and  purpose of the Trust.         It is pertinent to notice that the appellant-Trust was recognized as a  public charitable trust under Section 12A(a) of the Income Tax Act vide order  29.4.1977 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.  In this context, it is  pertinent to notice that the appellant claims exemption of the land held by it for  the period from 1965 to 1976 from the payment of urban land tax under the  Act.  Since the order was passed on 29.4.1977 by the Income Tax Appellate  Tribunal recognizing the appellant-Trust as a charitable Trust under Section  12A(a) of the Act, the appellant cannot claim the benefit of the order dated  29.4.1977 to their Trust since the exemption of the land from payment of urban  land tax was claimed only for the period 1965 to 1976.  The Assessing  Authority under the Act imposed urban land tax on the appellant-Trust.   The  appellant preferred Writ Petition No. 4468 of 1977 which was allowed by the  High Court allowing the appellant to approach the authorities under Section 27  of the Act.  Pursuant to the order of the High Court, the appellant approached  the authorities for exemption under Section 27 of the Act which was rejected  by the authorities on 28.1.1982.  The appellant preferred a writ petition being  W.P. No. 1562 of 1982.  The respondents issued a fresh G.O. being G.O. Ms.  No. 1834(Rev.) dated 29.10.1983 stipulating fresh and additional norms for the  benefit of exemption from payment of urban land tax.  The Writ Petition No.  1562 of 1982 filed by the appellant was allowed directing fresh disposal of the  appellant’s application keeping in view that bodies which have been  recognized as charitable institutions must be exempted by the Urban Land Tax  Authorities.  The appellant-Trust requested for disposal of its application in  terms of the judgment and order dated 18.4.1988 passed by the High Court.  

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8  

While so, the respondents asked the appellant to make a fresh application along  with audited statements.  The appellant requested the authorities that its  pending application be considered.  The respondents by order dated 4.10.1988  rejected the application of the appellant vide order Lr.(Ms) No.1896  on the  ground that the appellant did not satisfy the norms stipulated in G.O.Ms. No.  1834(Rev) dated 29.10.1983.  In the meanwhile, a Contempt Application was  filed bringing to the notice of the High Court that the application of the  appellant was decided de hors the directions of the High Court in W.P.No.  1562 of 1982 directing the authorities to dispose of the application keeping in  view that bodies which have been recognized as charitable institutions must be  exempted by the Urban Land Tax Authorities.  The said contempt application  was withdrawn with liberty to challenge the order dated 4.10.1988 passed by  the respondents.  Hence the appellant preferred W.P.No. 14745 of 1988 and  C.M.P. No. 22080 of 1988 challenging the aforesaid order.  The said writ  petition was rejected by the learned single Judge on 3.9.1998.  The appellant  preferred Writ Appeal No. 1190 of 1999 along with C.M.P. No. 11716 of 1999  which was again dismissed by the Division Bench on 30.7.1999.  Aggrieved by  that, the appellant preferred the special leave petitions on 16.12.1999 and this  Court granted leave on 11.2.2000.         We heard Mr. Uday U. Lalit, learned senior counsel appearing for the  appellant-Trust and Mr. S. Balakrishnan, learned senior counsel appearing for  the respondents.         Leaned senior counsel appearing for the appellant invited our attention  to the orders passed in various writ petitions, the Government Orders and also  of the impugned orders and the orders passed by the authorities rejecting the  claim for exemption.  He submitted that the appellant-Trust was entitled to  exemption from paying urban land tax as it met the criterion laid down in the  Government Order G.O.Ms. No. 2625 (Rev) dated 27.12.1976, which clearly  stated that all institutions recognized as charitable institutions under the Income  Tax Act will be dealt as such for the purpose of concessions under the Act.  He  would further submit that the High Court has failed to appreciate that the  entitlement to exemption from paying urban land tax should have been decided  in accordance with the law that existed in the assessment years for which the  exemption was sought and not in accordance with any subsequent Government  Order.  It was further contended that the High Court has failed to appreciate  that the G.O. Ms. No. 1834 dated 29.10.1983 cannot be construed as to have  the effect of altering the law applicable in the year of assessment in which the  claim of exemption was made.  It was further contended that the subsequent  G.O.Ms. No. 1834 dated 29.10.1983 laid down additional conditions for the  grant of exemption and they will not have effect of denying the appellant the  benefit as it is not restrospective in effect and consequently it can not be  applied to the assessment years for which the exemption was sought.  Learned  senior counsel invited our attention to the order passed by the High Court in  Writ Petition No. 1562 of 1982 which had directed the respondents to consider  the claim of the appellant in accordance with the terms and conditions of the  Government Order G.O. Ms. No. 2625 (Rev) dated 27.12.1976 and accordingly  the claim should have been settled in the light of the said Government Order.   He would further submit that the order passed in Writ Petition No. 1562 of  1982 has become final in so far as the parties were concerned since no appeal  had been filed against it and the principle of res judicata under Section 11  Explanation 4 of the C.P.C. is applicable to the present case and the  Government is precluded from relying on the basis of the G.O. Ms. No. 1834  dated 29.10.1983 which it did not bring to the notice of the Court during the  pendency of the writ petition.         Mr. S. Balakrishnan, learned senior counsel appearing for the  respondents, reiterated the contentions raised before the authorities and also of  the High Court and submitted that the appellant is not entitled to claim  exemption from payment of urban land tax on the basis of the order passed by  the Income Tax Authorities since the exemption claim made by the appellant  was only for the period 1965 to 1976 from payment of urban land tax and  whereas the Income Tax Department recognized the appellant as a public  charitable trust under Section 12A(a) of the Income Tax Act  vide Order dated  29.4.1977 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.  He would further  submit that G.O.Ms. Nos. 1947, 2056 and 2625 were subsequently modified by  the respondents and that the appellant-Trust itself requested for the disposal of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 8  

its application in terms of the judgment and order dated 18.4.1988 passed by  the learned single Judge of the High Court and thereafter the respondents asked  the appellant to make the fresh application along with audited statements.   Unfortunately, the subsequent G.O. Ms. No. 1834(Rev) dated 29.10.1983 was  not brought to the notice of the learned single Judge while disposing of writ  Petition No. 1562 of 1982.  The authorities while considering the claim for  exemption as per the orders of the Court considered all the earlier G.Os and  G.O.Ms. No. 1834(Rev) dated 29.10.1983 and rejected the claim for exemption  made by the appellant.  G.O. Ms. No. 1834(Rev) dated 29.10.1983 was already  in existence when the authorities considered the application on 4.10.1988 for  claim for exemption and rejected the same by a detailed order.           The contention of the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant  that the criteria laid down in G.O. Ms. No. 2625 (Rev) dated 27.12.1976  alone  should have been taken into consideration  and not the other G.Os has no force  since while construing the claim, after remand, the authorities are under  obligation to consider all the G.Os which are in existence at the time of  disposal of the application.  Therefore, we hold that the authorities had rightly  applied the test in terms and conditions mentioned in G.O. Ms. No. 1834 dated   29.10.1983 to the case on hand.  The only contention which was urged by the  learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant was that since the appellant- Trust was recognized as a public charitable trust under Section 12A(a) of the  Income Tax Act, the appellant-Trust should have been granted exemption from  payment of urban land tax for the period 1965-1976.  As already noticed the  said claim has no force since the income Tax Department has recognized the  appellant-Trust as a charitable Trust under Section 12A(a) of the Income Tax  Act only on 29.4.1977 and, therefore, the said order cannot be given  retrospective effect.         We have perused G.O.Ms. No. 2625 (Rev) dated 27.12.1976 passed by  the Government of Tamil Nadu which in turn refers to earlier G.O. Ms. 1947  Dated 17.9.1976 and G.O. Ms. No. 2056 (Rev) dated 4.10.1976.  Clause (vi) of  the said G.O. is reproduced hereunder:      "In the G.O. first cited, Government have directed that total  exemption from payment of urban land tax be given to all  educational, religious, charitable and philanthropic institutions in  respect of vacant land and land on which buildings have been  constructed from which the institutions derive income which is being  used solely for their objectives and purposes, they have also directed  that urban land tax be reduced to 50% in respect of both vacant land  and land on which buildings have been constructed which belong to  community recreation centres, clubs and cine studios.  These  concessions are operative with retrospective effect from 01.07.1975  and will be available only so long as the urban land is specifically  used for the purposes of the institutions concerned.  If there is  violation in the use of or diversion of the income derived from the  urban land, the full urban land tax is to be levied as provided for in  the Act.  If the institution concerned disposes of urban land by sale,  gift, etc. it has to pay the Government the entire amount of urban  land tax payable upto the date of such alienation.  In the same G.O.  the Government have constituted an ’Empowered Committee’ for  the purpose of examining and making recommendations to the  Government regarding cases eligible for the above concessions.   These concessions will now be given with retrospective effect from  the Faslis from which such exemption has been prayed for by the  respective institutions provided that there will be granted as provided  for in the G.O. first cited on specific application to Government and  on the basis of the recommendation of the Empowered Committee."  

       It is seen from the above G.O. that the total exemption from payment of  urban land tax be given to all educational, religious charitable and  philanthropic institutions in respect of vacant land and land on which buildings  have been constructed from which the institutions derive income which is  being used solely for their objectives and purposes.    The G.O. further  stipulates that if there is violation in the use of or diversion of the income  derived from the urban land, the full urban land tax is to be levied as provided  for in the Act.  The G.O. further states that these concessions will now be given

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 8  

with retrospective effect from the Faslis from which such exemption has been  prayed for by the respective institutions provided there will be granted as  provided for in the G.O. first cited that is G.O. Ms. No. 1947 (Rev) dated  17.9.1976 on specific application to Government and on the basis of the  recommendation of the Empowered Committee. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant fairly conceded that the  appellant-Trust have based their claim only on the basis of the Government  Order and of the order passed by the Income Tax Department and have not  made any specific application to the government before 29.9.1980.  No earlier  application was ever produced either before the High Court or before this  Court.  The recommendations of the Empowered Committee have also not  produced or placed before us.  It is thus clear that the appellant-Trust is not  entitled to claim exemption from payment of Urban land Tax in the absence of  any prayer for such exemption by a specific application to the Government and  on the basis of the recommendation of the Empowered Committee.          As already noticed, the respondents while considering G.O. Ms. No.  1834 dated 29.10.1983 which was already in existence, the said G.O. in turn,  refers to five other Government Orders  which are as follows: 1.      G.O. Ms. No. 1947, Revenue dated 17.9.1976 2.      G.O. Ms. No. 2625, Revenue dated 27.12.1976 3.      G.O. Ms. No. 1803 Revenue dated 1.8.1978 4.      Government letter No. 78025(a)/Ui/78-13 Revenue  Dated 24.9.1980 5.      G.O. Ms. No. 461, Revenue dated 17.3.1983

The existing guidelines as per the above G.O. are as under: 1.      The institutions should have been recognized as charitable and  exemption granted under Section 12A(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2.      The institutions should spend at least 90% of its net income towards its  objectives and purposes, after deducting all the inevitable charges like  payment of local taxes, repairs and maintenance etc. 3.      The institution should be a public trust and not a private trust.

The exemption committee constituted in G.O. Ms. No. 461, Revenue  dated 17.8.1983 felt that the existing norms for grant of exemption from urban  land tax needed some revision, since in the existing norms there is no ceiling  regarding the expenses on establishment to be deducted out of the income in  respect of religious institutions and trusts.  They felt that the present norms  require the institution to spend 90% of the net income towards its objectives  which is on the high side and, therefore, the Government on the basis of the  recommendation of the Committee revised the norms and guidelines for grant  of exemption to the religious charitable trust etc.  In this context, it is useful to see the order dated 4.10.1988 passed by the  Commissioner and Secretary to the Government, Revenue Department.  A  detailed order was passed by the Commissioner and Secretary to the  Government of T.N.  It is useful to reproduce paragraph 3 of the said order  which reads as under: "Section 29(k) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Tax Act, 1966 provides  for grant of exemption to any Urban land actually used for religious,  charitable or philanthropic purposes by such religious, charitable or  philanthropic institutions but not including any Urban Land owned by  such institutions and (i) which is vacant or (ii) in which buildings,  from which income is derived, have been constructed.  While  examining the instant case with reference to above Section, it is seen  that the trust owns 62 grounds and 2243 sq. ft. of Urban lands in  Tondiarpet, T. Nagar and Thiruvottiyur Villages.  The whole extent is  assessed to Urban Land tax, for which it has sought exemption.  The  Urban lands in Tondiarpet Village are used for running cinema  theatre, saw mill, godown etc. and the lands in T.Nagar and  Thiruvottiyur villages are used as residential buildings.  The  objectives of the Trust, according to the trust deed, are as follows:

i)      to establish, conduct and maintain residential and non- residential schools, colleges and other institutions for

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8  

imparting general, technical, vocational, professional  and/other kinds of education and training for the welfare  of the general public.   ii)     to provide scholarships for the benefits of students and to  make donations and grants to other institutions for the  benefit of students and scholars and in furtherance of  education and  iii)    such other things.

It is obvious from the above, that the buildings are not used for  the objective of the trust.  The trust is not running any  educational institution in accordance with its objectives.  It has  not also furnished any evidence to show that it is providing  scholarships for the benefits of students.  In view of this, the  lands which are used as Cinema theatre, saw mill, godowns, let  out for residential and commercial purposes do not deserve  exemption under Section 29(k) of the Act."       

       It was further observed, "The grant of exemption under section 27(1) is obligatory and not  mandatory, and it is a matter of Governmental discretion governed  by reasonable guidelines issued by the Government.  Accordingly,  the Government have issued executive instructions in G.O.(Ms)  No.1947, Revenue dated 17.9.1976 and in G.O.(Ms) No. 2625,  Revenue dated 27.12.1976 for the grant of exemption under section  27(1) of the Act in respect of the vacant lands and the lands on  which buildings have been constructed from which the Charities,  philanthropic and Educational Institutions derive income which is  being used solely for the objectives of and purposes of such  institutions but subject to the conditions that such concessions will  be granted on specific application to Government.  The Government  in G.O.Ms.No.1834, Revenue, dated 29-10-1983, have also  prescribed certain norms and conditions for grant of exemption   under Section 27(1) of the Act."

The paragraphs 5 & 6 of the order read as under: "While examining the case, with the available particulars already  furnished by the Trust, it is considered that the trust is not eligible  for grant of exemption for the following reasons:- i)      The trust has not satisfied the main norms that it has to spend  90% of its income for its objectives and purposes during the  years 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 it has spent only 9.9%,  49.5% its net income for its objectives. ii)     The whole extent of the lands are used for commercial and  residential purposes.  No piece of land is used for the  charitable purpose.  Further it has not produced any evidence  to show that the income is spent for the objectives and  purposes of the Trust. iii)    Though the Trust has satisfied one of the norms that it has  been recognized as a charitable institution under Section  12a(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 it has no binding force to  exempt the lands owned by the Trust from the provisions of  the Urban Land Tax Act also. iv)     Further the lands owned by the Trust are not eligible for grant  of exemption under Section 29(K) of the Act since the  buildings are used as Cinema Theatre, Saw Mills, Godowns  and let out for commercial/residential purposes. v)      The Trust is also not eligible for grant of exemption Under  Section 27(1) (Hardship clause) of the Act, because the lands  are used for running cinema theatre, saw mill, godowns and  let out for commercial/residential purposes and it derives a  large income from the lands.  Hence it has no undue hardship  to pay the tax.  

In the circumstances stated above, the Government have decided that

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 8  

the Agasthyar Trust is not eligible for grant of exemption from the  payment of urban land tax in accordance with the Tamil Nadu Urban  Land Tax Act, 1966, and the existing executive orders.  Your  exemption petitioner is accordingly rejected."         Aggrieved by the above order, the appellant preferred writ petition  before the High Court to quash the above order dated 4.10.1988 and to direct  the respondents herein to grant exemption from payment under Section 27 of  the Act in respect of the urban land held by the Trust.   The said writ petition  was dismissed by a detailed order passed by the learned single Judge which  was affirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court in W.A.No. 1190 of  1999.  The order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court reads as  under: "Heard both sides.  In an enquiry initiated at the instance of the  appellant, who has claimed exemption from payment of Urban Land  Tax it has been found that the appellant does not satisfy the guidelines  mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.1843 Revenue dated 29-10-1983 for claiming  exemption as prayed for.  It has been found that the appellant trust does  not satisfy the claim that it has to spend 90% of its income for charitable  purposes.  It has only spent 9.9% and 49.5% of its net income for the  said objectives.  Inter alia it has further been found that the whole extent  of the lands of the appellant are used for running cinema theatre, saw  mill, godowns the same are let out for commercialized residential  purposes and they truly derives a large income from the lands and no  piece of land is used for charitable purposes.  Moreover no evidence has  been produced by the appellant to show that the income of the trust is  spent for the charitable purposes.  The aforesaid finding of the 1st  respondent has been affirmed by the learned single Judge in the writ  petition.  We do not find any irregularity or illegality in the finding of  the learned single Judge and the same does not call for any interference  in the present appeal.  Present appeal, in the circumstances, is dismissed.   Consequently, C.M.P. No. 11716/99 is also dismissed."  

       We have also perused the grounds of appeal filed in W.A. No. 1190 of  1999.  The appellant has not raised any ground in the writ appeal that G.O. Ms.  No. 1834 dated 29.10.1983 is not at all applicable to the present case and the  Government is precluded from relying on the said G.O.  The said ground is  taken for the first time only in this Court saying that the entitlement from  exemption should have been decided in accordance with law that existed in the  assessment year for which the exemption was sought and not in accordance  with any subsequent Government Order. Ground No. 12 taken in the writ appeal needs special mention in this  context which reads as follows: "In any event, the learned judge ought to have permitted the  appellant to satisfy the requirements of G.O. Ms. 1834 Revenue  dated 29.10.1983 as submitted as an alternative prayer by the  appellant’s counsel during the course of his arguments."   

In the matter of exemption, under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Land Tax  Act, there is a marked difference between Sections 27 and 29 of the Act.   Sections 27 and 29 of the Act read as under: 27. Power of Government to exempt or reduce urban land tax.-  (1) The Government, if satisfied that the payment of urban land tax  in respect of any class of urban lands or by any class of persons will  cause undue hardship, they may, subject to such rules as may be  made in this behalf, by order-

(a) exempt such lands or persons from the payment of the urban land  tax; or  (b) reduce the amount of such urban land tax whether prospectively  or retrospectively.

(2) The Government may at any time cancel or modify any order  issued under sub-section (1) and upon such cancellation or  modification, the entire amount of urban land tax, or the amount of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 8  

urban land tax due under the modified order, as the case may, shall  be payable in respect of the land concerned with effect from the fasli  year in which such cancellation or modification is made:

Provided that no such cancellation or modification shall be  made unless the party likely to be affected by such cancellation or  modification has had a reasonable opportunity of making his  representations.  

29. Exemptions.- Nothing in this Act shall apply to- (a) any urban land owned by the State or the Central Government; (b) any urban land owned by \026  

(i) the Corporation of Madras; (ii) a Municipal Council constituted under the Tamil Nadu District  Municipalities Act, 1920 (Tamil Nadu Act V of 1920); (iii) A Township Committee constituted under the Mettur Township  Act, 1940, (Tamil Nadu Act XI of 1940) the Courtallam Township  Act, 1954 (Tamil Nadu Act XVI of 1954), the Bhavanisagar  Township Act, 1954, (Tamil Nadu Act XXV of 1954) or section 4 of  the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1958 (Tamil Nadu Act XXXV of  1958) or under any other law for the time being in force. (iv) a Panchayat or Panchayat Union Council constituted under any  law for the time being in force;

(c) any urban land owned by a religious institution, which is set apart  for public worship and is actually so used, including any urban land  owned by such institution and which is appurtenant thereto but not  including any urban land owned by such institution and \026

(i) which is vacant, or (ii) in which buildings from which income is derived have been  constructed;

(d) (i) any urban land on which hospitals maintained by \026  

(a) the Government, any local authority or such other authority  specified by the Government in this behalf; or  

(b) by any private institution which is in receipt of grant either from  the Central Government or from the State Government;

have been constructed and any urban land appurtenant to such  hospitals; or  

(ii) any urban land used for purposes directly connected with such  hospitals, but not including any urban land \026  

(a) which is vacant, or  

(b) in which buildings, from which income is derived have been  constructed.

Explanation.- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that  the urban land on which staff quarters including nurses quarters or  any other buildings directly connected with the purposes of the said  hospitals have been constructed shall be deemed to be urban land  used for purposes directly connected with the said hospitals;

(e) any urban land solely used for purposes connected with the  disposal of the dead;

(f) roads or urban lands used for communal purposes;

(g) any urban land used for public purposes, provided that no rent is

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 8  

charged for, or no remuneration is derived from, such user;

(h) any urban land used by schools, colleges or universities for  purposes directly connected with education, but not including any  urban land owned by such educational institutions and \026  

(i) which is vacant, or  

(ii) in which buildings from which income is derived have been  constructed.

Explanation I.- For the purposes of this clause, schools or colleges  shall mean only such schools or colleges which are educational  institutions recognized either by the Government or by any  University, as the case may be.  

Explanation II.- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared  that the urban land on which schools, colleges or universities or staff  quarters or hostels or other buildings used for the welfare of the  students, have been constructed, or used as playgrounds attached to  such schools, colleges or universities, shall be deemed to be urban  land used for the purposes directly connected with education;

(i) any urban land used for public parks, public libraries and public  museums;

(j) any urban land used \026  

(i) for charitable purposes of sheltering destitute persons or animals;

(ii) for orphanages, homes and schools for the deaf and dumb and for  the infirm and diseased;

(iii) for asylum for the aged and for fallen women;

(k) subject to the provisions of this section, any urban land actually  used for religious, charitable or philanthropic purposes by such  religious, charitable or philanthropic institutions, as the Government  may, by notification, specify, but not including any urban land  owned by such institutions and \026  

(i) which is vacant, or  

(ii) in which buildings from which income is derived have been  constructed;

(l) any urban land used for the preservation of ancient monuments."     

While under Section 29, the exemption is granted by the statute itself  and is automatic in respect of the urban lands owned by the authorities or  institutions referred to therein, the exemption under Section 27 is not so.  For  exemption under Section 27, power is vested with the State Government to  exempt the lands or persons from payment of tax "if the Government is  satisfied that the payment of urban land tax \005\005would cause undue hardship".   Such power can be exercised by the Government only on specific application  by the person or institution seeking exemption and on placing satisfactory  material for exercise of such power.  The exemption under Section 27 is not a  matter of right and does not follow as a matter of course.

No other contention was raised.  There is absolutely no merit in the civil  appeals.  The appellant is not entitled to exemption from payment of urban  land tax during the period 1965-1976 as prayed for.

The appeals are accordingly dismissed.  No costs.