BAHRAMJI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On facts there is no issue in this writ petition. The facts are that at the time when the writ petition was brought to the High Court in 1989, there was a Town Area, Basra. In 1989 the Town Area, Basra did not have a committee, known as the Town Area Committee. This body had been superseded. An administrator set on this body to carry on the functions which otherwise would have been the functions of the elected representatives.

(2.) Regarding the entertainment which was being carried on within the Town Area in cinema, a show tax was proposed and imposed. The petitioner raises the issue that the Town Area had been superseded by the State Government and was shorn of its elected representatives and it was being administered by an administrator. Thus, the petitioner contends that the administrator did not have the sanctioned of law to impose fresh taxes or revise taxes.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Siddhartha Verma, and the Additional Chief Standing Counsel, Mr. B.N. Misra.