KWALITY MONUMENTS Vs. THE TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order calling for the records relating to R.O.C. No. 25789 of 1977 B -2 on the file of the second respondent, (the Collector of Dharmapuri) and quashing the order dated 23rd February, 1977 passed therein.

(2.) The petitioner partnership had taken 2 -50 acres of land in Palacode Taluk on lease from the Government for purposes of quarrying on a rent of Rs. 2,600 per annum for a period of ten years from 30th October, 1972 to 29th October, 1982. As per the terms of the lease, the petitioner paid the entire amount. A lease deed dated 30th October, 1972 was entered into providing inter alia for immediate cancellation of the lease in case the petitioner used the land for any purpose other than quarrying and also for termination of the lease by the issue of six months' notice by either of the parties thereto. The second respondent by his proceedings dated 23rd February, 1977 demanded payment of Rs. 11,700 as local cess at Rs. 0.45 per rupee on the entire rent of Rs. 26,000 for the full period of ten years and Rs. 39,000 as local cess surcharge at Rs. 1.50 per rupee of the lease amount. That notice issued in cancellation of an earlier notice dated 23rd February, 1977 whereby the petitioners have been asked by the second respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 26,000 as deposit towards the local cess and local cess surcharge, in view of the fact that the question relating to payment of local cess and local cess surcharge was pending consideration in this Court. The contentions urged on behalf of the petitioners are: (1) that there must be a levy each year and there can be no demand on the basis of the rent paid for all the years since the lease can be terminated even before the expiry of the period and the lease can be terminated by the issue of six months' notice on either side; and (2) that the local cess surcharge can be levied under Ss. 115 and 116 of the Panchayats Act, 1959, only by the Panchayat Union concerned and not by the Government.

(3.) In the counter -affidavit, it is contended that the levy of local cess surcharge is valid and constitutional and that necessary resolution has been passed by the Panchayat Union Council concerned on 22nd April, 1974 for that purpose and that the local cess and local cess surcharge are also collected by the Revenue Department. But, in the course of the arguments, it is conceded by the learned Counsel for the respondents that the resolution dated 22nd April, 1974 is only for the purpose of reducing the rate of local cess surcharge to Rs. 1.50 per rupee of the land revenue. In the counter -affidavit, it is further contended that the lease has been granted to the petitioner for a period of ten years, and, therefore, the local cess and the local cess surcharge are demanded for the entire period on the basis of the entire lease amount. The further contention in the counter -affidavit that the petitioner should have moved the Director of Industries and Commerce and the Government by appeals and that it has not exhausted the alternative remedy and, therefore, the writ petition is premature and not maintainable was not pressed by the learned Counsel for the respondents in the course of the arguments.