GOTTETY VENKATA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order of our learned brother, Basi Reddi, J., dismissing W. P. No. 1444 of 1958.

(2.) The point raised In the writ petition and in the appeal before us is whether land-cess could be levied under Section 78 of the Madras District Beards Act, 1920 on royalty in respect of a mining lease. The appellant had taken on lease from the Government an iron ore mine. Land-cess was levied on the basis of the rent payable by the appellant to the lessor, the Government. It was urged before our learned brother that no land cess could be imposed on the basis of the rent payable by him and that, secondly, the District Board had no power to levy cess after the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 was passed. This argument was based on Section 7G-A of the Madras District Boards Act, 1920. The learned Judge negatived both the contentions, the first one having been covered by the judgment of this Court in Murthy H.R.S. v. Collector of Chittoor, W. P. Nos. 534 and 535 of 1958. D/- 25-3-1960, the second one for the reason that Section 76-A of the District Boards Act would not come to the rescue of the appellant because the levy was not made under that section and, secondly, no provision had been made by Parliament for the levy of land-cess on the annual rent value computed on the royalty payable to Government in respect of mining leases. In the result, the writ petition was dismissed. It is this order of our learned brother that is brought under appeal.

(3.) It is urged in support of this appeal by Sri Gopal Rao, learned counsel for the appellant, that the Bench decision of this Court in W. P. Nos. 534 and 535 of 1958, D/-25-3-1960, requires reconsideration, as this Court had net considered the question whether Section 79 of the Act contravened the provisions o Article 14 of the Constitution. The argument of Sri Gopal Rao in this behalf is that bald power unguided by rules was vested in the assessing authority in regard to the choice of persons for exemption falling under Section 111 of the District Boards Act. Section 79 discriminates between persons falling under Clauses (i) and (ii) and those falling under Clause (iii) in that while the persons falling under the latter category are given the right of appeal against the assessment, those coming under the former are denied such a right, continues the learned counsel.