RAMCHAND SUGADAS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent from a decision of Shrivastava J dismissing an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the appellant challenging the validity of the imposition of octroi tax by the Municipal Committee, Waraseoni.

(2.) THE material section of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922, under which the Committee imposed the impugned octroi duty is Section 67 which is as follows: -

(3.) THE argument that Shri Mandlekar, learned counsel for the appellant, presented before us was that on the proposals being returned to the committee for further consideration by the Government under sub -section (1) they became relegated to the stage contemplated by sub -section (1) and that, therefore, all the formalities prescribed in sub -sections (2), (3) and (4) had to be carried out again before they could be re -submitted to the Government for sanction. We are unable to accede to this contention. Section 67 itself nowhere provides that when a proposal is returned by the Government to the committee for further consideration, the whole procedure laid down in sub -sections (2), (3) and (4) shall be followed again before submitting it to the Government. An examination of S. 67 shows that or cethe committee resolves to propose the imposition of a tax, publishes the resolution, and submits it for acceptance to the Government after considering the objections to the proposed tax, republication of the resolution again in the manner prescribed in sub -section (2) is not necessary even if the Government returns it to the committee for further consideration and the committee reiterates the resolution. When a resolution is returned to the committee for further consideration under sub -section (5), it is relegated to the stage of sub -section (4) and not of sub -section (1). This is obvious from the fact that "further consideration" contemplated by sub -section (5) is not of the question whether the committee should or not resolve to propose the imposition of any tax, but it is of the resolution as already passed, in the light of the suggestions made by the Government and further consideration of the objections already received to the proposal under sub -section (3). Now sub -section (4) clearly shows that at this stage republication of the resolution in the manner prescribed in sub -section (2) is necessary only if the committee decides to modify the proposals so as to affect their substance. If, therefore, the committee does not make any such modification and decides to resubmit the proposals to the Government for acceptance substantially in the same form as before, publication of the resolution again is wholly unnecessary. The reiteration of a resolution by the committee after it has been remitted to it for further consideration by the Government not being the initial passing of the resolution to propose the imposition of any tax within the meaning of sub -section (1), there can be no question of publication of the resolution under sub -section (2) and of the inhabitants being given a further opportunity to lodge their objections to the tax.