ANGAD PANDEY Vs. TOWN AREA COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, two notices issued by the Respondent to the Petitioner, copies whereof have been attached as Annexures 1 and 2, are sought to be quashed. Annexure 1 is copy of a notice issued under Section 20 of the Town Areas Act 1914 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) whereas Annexure 2 is copy of a notice issued under Section 21 of the same Act. It appears that the Petitioner had been granted a theka by the Gram Sabha, Karara for realization of Tahbazari dues. The case of the Respondent was that a portion of the contract money had not been paid by the Petitioner. The Gram Sabha was subsequently replaced by the Town Area Committee, Karara, which is the Respondent before us. It has been urged by the counsel for the Petitioner that neither Section 20 nor Section 21 of the Town Areas Act was attracted to the facts of the instant case. According to counsel for the Petitioner, Section 20 applies to recovery of instalment of tax, whereas Section 21 applies to recovery of arrears of any tax imposed under the Act. It was urged that the balance of the contract money could not be treated either as an instalment of tax or as arrears of tax imposed under the Act it is for this reason that neither Section 20 nor Section 21 of the Act was applicable.

(2.) Having heard counsel for the parties we are of opinion that there is substance in the submission made by counsel for the Petitioner. On a plain reading of Sections 20 and 21 it is apparent that these two Sections do not entitle the Town Area Committee to realise any unpaid amount of theka money and they deal with recovery of installment or arrears of tax imposed under the Act.

(3.) In Mumtaz Alt v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate,1970 AWR 6 it was held that where there was a contract for realization of Tahbazari tax and the contractor failed to give the amount of contract, Section 21 of the Act was not applicable.