THE NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE, GARH MUKTESHWAR THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, SRI KHAZAN SINGH Vs. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER, MEERUT DIVISION, MEERUT AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Notified Area Garhmukteshwar enforced levy of toll tax with effect from April 1, 1964. The levy was, inter alia, on laden cycles, laden motor lorry and laden motor truck etc. Laden motor lorry or laden motor trucks were liable to pay a toll of Rs. 4/ - for entering into the limits of Garhmukteshwar. Respondents 2 to 6 operated motor vehicles on Bulandshahr -Siana -Garhmukteshwar route. The Town Area Committee did not permit them to enter its limits without paying the toll of Rs. 4/ -. Aggrieved they made an application to the Sub -Divisional Magistrate praying that the rate of toll was excessive and the amount should be reduced to Rs. 1. 25 per day. This application was rejected on October 20, 1970. The Respondents filed appeals before the Additional Commissioner, Meerut. At this stage they also challenged the validity of the levy itself. The Additional Commissioner held that on a true construction of the relevant entries which mention laden motor lorry or laden motor truck, passenger lorry or passenger trucks were not included specially when they did not pass through the limits of the town area. Since the Respondents' buses come to Garhmukteshwar, stop there at the stand and then return to Bulandshahr, they did not come within the purview of the entry and were not liable to pay toll at all. He quashed the assessment of toll on the Respondents vehicles at the rate of Rs. 4/ - per trip. Aggrieved the Notified Area Committee instituted a writ petition in this Court. The learned Single Judge held that no appeal lay to the Addl. Commr. His order was bad on that account. He also held that the imposition of the tax was invalid because the Sub -Divisional Magistrate who sanctioned the proposals and the rules had no power to do so because there was no valid delegation in his favour. On these findings the writ petition was dismissed without going into the merits of the case and deciding the question whether the relevant entry covered passenger vehicles also.

(2.) In the present appeal Pandit Kanhaiya Lal Misra appearing for the Appellant Committee challenged the finding regarding powers possessed by the Sub -Divisional Magistrate. Ss. 15 -A and 15 -B of the U.P. Town Areas Act lay down the procedure for imposition of a tax including toll tax. Under it the Town Area Committee is to frame proposals and the rules are settled by it after inviting objections. The settled proposals are considered by the Prescribed Authority or the District Magistrate, as the case may be, and sanctioned. Thereafter the matter goes to the State Government and after the State Government's sanction the Town Area fixes a day for the imposition of the tax. The prescribed authority or the District Magistrate thereafter notifies the imposition in the prescribed manner. In this procedure the Prescribed Authority or if none is appointed the District Magistrate is given the power to sanction the proposals and then to notify and enforce the rules in the prescribed manner.

(3.) Sec. 4 of the Act provides: