D.K. Kapar, J.
(1) As a short point is involved, we issue Rule Db and proceed to decide the petition. A notice to show cause was issued in this case. Certain objections were filed by the petitioner relating to the house tax claiming that the house tax should be calculated on the basis of the standard rent. Apparently, this was not accepted by the Ndmc, which proceeded to fix the value on the basis of Section 9(4) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. As held by the Supreme Court in Dr. Balbir Singh v. Mcd : 152ITR388(SC) the Committee should fix the standard rent in accordance with law. In case the data is not sufficient, it has to determine the standard rent on the basis of such data as collected by itself. In fact, the learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that data is sufficient. But, we refuse to make any comment about this question.
(2) It was also urged that the alternative remedy by way of appeal should have been exercised by the petitioner and we should refuse to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Normally, this would 437 have been a valid point, but in a simple case like the present where the law has been settled by the Supreme Court, but the Municipal authorities appear to have proceeded on the basis different from the one laid down by the Supreme Court, which is a pure question of jurisdiction or wrong application of law. So. we cannot decline to exercise the jurisdiction. We accordingly set aside the assessment and direct the New Delhi Municipal Committee to refix the rateable value on the basis of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Dr. Balbir Singh's case, i.e. by determining the standard rent on the basis of the cost of construction and the value of land. Parties will bear their own costs.