LODGING HOUSE FUND Vs. DURGA PRASAD SUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused -Respondent was prosecuted under Rule 10 of the Orissa Terminal Tax Collection Rules, 1951, framed under Section 23 of Bihar & Orissa Pilgrimage Act, 1920.

(2.) THE prosecution report filed by the clerk, Banshidar Das, p.w. 1, Lodging House Fund with the sanction of the Magistrate in charge of the said fund, has set out a description of the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused in para 7 thereof. It is stated there that the accused failed to deposit the road terminal tax which he had collected from passengers travelling in his vehicle O.R.C. 280, during the months of November and December, 1963, and also defaulted to submit returns in respect of such collected tax and thereby contravened the rules 6 and 7 of the Orissa Road Terminal Tax Collection Rules, 1951. Accordingly, he is liable to be punished under Rule 10 thereof.

(3.) SECTION 20 of the Bihar & Orissa Pilgrimage Act, 1920, provides for constitution of a Lodging House Fund in any area to which this Act applies and in pursuance thereof, the Puri Lodging House Fund was constituted for Puri town, and a Magistrate was put in charge of the said fund. Rule 6 of the Orissa Terminal Tax Collection Rules, 1951, enjoined upon the accused to credit to the Puri Lodging House Fund the terminal tax collected by him during the months of November and December, 1963. Rule 7 thereof also obliged the accused to submit a return in the form annexed to the Rules. He defaulted in carrying out his obligations under both those rules and therefore, he was liable to be punished under Rule 10.