JAGDISH RAJ GUPTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the notification dated 9.7.1999 issued by the State Government under Section 5(1) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (for short, 'the Act') for extending the limits of Municipal Council, Sujanpur (for short, the Municipal Council) by including the areas of Village Sujanpur Dehati, Kailashpur, Chak Bhajura, Soali Bholi, Chak Phulpiara, Azizpur and Chhota Bhanwal.

(2.) A perusal of the averments made in the petitions shows that some of the petitioners are running small scale industries while others are engaged in trade/business activities in the afore-mentioned villages, which were situated on the periphery of the extended municipal limits. They have been joined by some of the office bearers of the Gram Panchayats for invalidation of the impugned notification on the following grounds :

(3.) According to the petitioners, they had established small scale industries and business premises outside the municipal limits of Sujanpur with a view to avoid payment of taxes like octroi, cess, house tax etc. and if the areas of their villages are included in the limits of the Municipal Council, they will have to pay taxes and that would jeopardise their business. They have further averred that the Municipal Council had proposed the inclusion of their villages within the municipal limits with the sole motive of obtaining taxes, but no plan has been prepared for development of these areas. They have further averred that the notification dated 8.4.1999 (Annexure P.1) was not published in the newspapers having circulation in the local area and no other recognised mode of publicity was adopted by the respondents to inform the residents of the areas of their villages and due to this aggrieved persons could not file objections. The petitioners have alleged that even those who had filed objections were not heard by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Local Government Department, Punjab and their objections were rejected without assigning cogent reasons. This is reflected in the following averments made in paragraphs 5 and 9 and extracts of paragraph 10 of the writ petition No. 9916 of 1999 :