DEENSHA SELVAMBHAL REP BY ITS PARTNER ANF AMANULLAH Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above writ petition is filed for issuance of writ of declaration declaring that the G.O.Ms.No.13 C.T.&R.E. dated 6.1.1990 of the Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowments Department inserting the amendments after Rule 3 of the Indian Partnership Act 1932 to be unconstitutional, invalid and illegal insofar as they relate to the petitioners.

(2.) THE writ petition has been filed on a misconception that the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.13 CT & RE brings in an amendment to Rule 3 of the Tamil Nadu Partnership (Registration of Firm) Rules 1932, whereas on going through G.O. 13 C.T. and R.E. Dated 6.1.1990, it is apparent that it has been issued showing the draft amendment and calling for objections from the concerned firm. THEreafter, on 10.1.1990 the said G.O has been notified in the Gazette No.2 in Part III dated 10.1.1990 and objections were received on 4.5.1990 from Periyar District Small Scale Industries Association, Erode and thereafter on 27.12.1990, G.O.Ms.No. 747 CT & RE Department was issued notifying the insertion of new Rule 3-A in the Madras Partnership (Registration of Firms) Rules, 1932 and the insertion of the Rule 3-A was notified in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette No.5 in Part III Section 1(a) dated 6.2.1991. THE petitioner, who has not given his objection to the draft notification dated 6.1.1990 is not entitled to challenge the same, after passing of the G.O.No.747 CT & RE Department dated 27.12.1990 that too after a period of more than 12 years. In any event, as rightly pointed out by Mr.Lakshmi Narayanan, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents G.O.Ms.No.747 CT & RE was challenged in W.P.No. 14493 of 1991 and the writ petition has been dismissed on 5.2.1999, by His Lordship P.Sathasivam,J (as he then was).