SARDAR GYANSINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in this case, who are all residents of Takhatpur in the Tehsil and district of Bilaspur, challenge the legality of a revised tax imposed on them in respect of buildings and property owned by them in the area of Gram Panchayat, Takhatpur. Their prayer is that the revision of tax be declared illegal and the demand notices issued to them for payment of tax according to the revised assessment be quashed by the issue of a writ of certiorari, The matter arises thus. On 15th April 1959 a notification was issued by the State Government dissolving the Gram Panchayat of Takhatpur. This action was taken under section 128 (1) of the 0. P. and Berar Panchayats Act, 1946. On the dissolution of the Panchayat, the Collector, Bilaspur, directed the Chief Executive Officer Janapada Sabba, Bilaspur, that the Deputy Chief Executive Officer of the said Janapada Sabha be directed to take charge of the office of the Gram Panchayat, He also issued an order purporting to be one under section 128 (2) of the Act saying that all functions of the dissolved Gram Panchayat would be performed by the Janapada Sabha. On 15th July 1958 the Chief Executive Officer, Janapada Sabha, had passed an order under section 27(1) of the Local Government Act, 1948, delegating to the Deputy Chief Executive Officer all powers with regard to the administration of the Janapada Sabha. The powers delegated related to the sanction of casual leave, signing of salary bills, signing of letters, attendance of Standing Committee meetings, inspection of institutions etc. The order passed by the Chief Executive Officer under section 27 (1) of the Act of 1948 also authorised the Deputy Chief Executive Officer to exercise the powers and perform the duties vested in the Chief Executive Officer under the Local Government Act, 1948, during his absence from headquarters. In 1955 the Janapada Sabba had passed a resolution appointing a sub -committee consisting of seven members for the supervision and control of all Gram Panchayats functioning within its jurisdiction. This sub -committee looked after the affairs of the dissolved Gram Panchayat of Takhatpur. Some two or three months after the dissolution of the Gram Panchayat the Deputy Executive Officer proceeded to revise the assessment of property situated in the Gram Panchayat area purporting to exercise powers under section 41 of the Panchayats Act, 1946, and the rules made under that Act. The return filed by the opponent -State itself says that the Deputy Chief Executive Officer made the assessment as provided by rule 1 of clause XXIV of the C. P. and Berar Panchayat Rules, 1948, and that after the assessment list was published as required by rule 2 the objections received to the assessment were considered and decided by the Deputy Chief Executive Officer and then a final list of assessment was posted on the notice -board of the Gram Panchayat Office on 15th December 1959.

(2.) THE petitioners contend that the Deputy Chief Executive Officer of Janapada Sabha, Bilaspur, bad no power whatsoever to revise the assessment, and that on the dissolution of the Gram Panchayat, the Janapada Sabha, Bilaspur, alone could exercise the power of revision of the assessment under section 41 and the rules made under the Panchayats Act, 1946. In order to appreciate this contention, which must be accepted, it is necessary to refer first to section 128 (2) of the Panchayats Act, 1946, That provision runs as follows - Until a new Panchayat is constituted either by re -election or by nomination, as the case may be, all functions of the Gram Panchayat so dissolved shall be performed by the District Council and all the property under the control of the Gram Panchayat including the Gram Panchayat fund shall be at the disposal of the District Council until the election or nomination of a new Gram Panchayat. It is clear from sub -section (2) that when a Gram Panchayat is dissolved the Janapada Sabha, as constituted under the Local Government Act, 1948, steps in and all the functions of the Gram Panchayat can be performed only by the Janapads Sabha. In performing the functions of the Gram Panchayat by virtue of section 128 (2), the Janapada Sabha does not exercise its powers and duties under the Local Government Act, 1948, but the powers, functions and duties of a Gram Panchayat under the Panchayats Act, 1946. The Janapada Sabha gets this power to perform the functions of the dissolved Gram Panchayat by force of the statutory provision contained in, sub -section -(2) of section 128 of the Panchayats Act. No order of any authority is necessary for this purpose. The order made by the Collector saying that the Janapada Sabha shall exercise the functions of the dissolved Gram Panchayat was a superfluity. The dissolution of a Gram Panchayat under section 128 (1) has not the effect of suspending the operation of the Panchayats Act, 1946, or of disabling the Secretary and other staff of the Gram Panchayat from exercising their powers and discharging their duties under the Panchayats Act, 1946, and the rules made thereunder. The administrative machinery of the dissolved Gram Panchayat continues to function. The effect of section 128 (2) is only to substitute the Janapada Sabha as a body constituted under the Local Government Act, 1948, in place of the dissolved Gram Panchayat.

(3.) IT is thus plain that the proceedings taken in the present case for the revision of assessment and the final assessment list ultimately prepared were wholly illegal. The illegality can only be ascribed to the failure of the authorities to bear in mind the vital distinction between the functions and powers which a Janapada Sabha performs under section 128 (2) of the Panchayats Act when a Gram Panchayat is dissolved, and the functions and powers of the Janapada Sabha and its Executive Officers under the Local Government Act, 1943. In the result the revision of assessment made by the Deputy Chief Executive Officer of the Janapada Sabha, Bilaspur, is declared to be illegal and the demand notices issued to each of the petitioners in so far as they relate to the payment of tax on the basis of the revised assessment are quashed. The applicants shall have costs of this application. Counsel's fee is fixed at Rs. 100. The outstanding amount of security deposit shall be refunded to the petitioners.