MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE Vs. CHAMAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MUNICIPAL Committee Rupar passed a resolution imposing tax on every person carrying on a "trade, profession, calling or employment" in the area of the municipal committee, and the Punjab Government by a notification, dated 15th of October, 1948, Exhibit D. 5, notified the imposition of the above -mentioned tax. A schedule was attached to that giving a list of trades, professions, callings and employments which were to be taxed and a sliding scale was fixed for those whose income exceeded Rs. 600 per annum. Chaman Lal Respondent, who was working as a clerk in the local branch of the Punjab National Bank, Limited, was served with a notice to pay Rs. 15 as tax for the year 1952 -53. Apparently, his income exceeded Rs. 800 but did not exceed Rs. 1,000. On his failure to make the payment, warrants were got issued for the recovery of the same. He brought the suit, out of which: the present appeal has arisen, challenging the authority of the municipal committee to impose such a tax. There were two points on which the suit was fought in the trial Court; first that under Clause (b) of Sub -section (1) of Section 61 of the Punjab Municipal Act tax could be imposed only on "persons practising any profession or art or carrying on any trade or calling in the municipality". It was urged that employment in a private company did not fall in any of these categories. By the explanation added to this Clause (b) "persons who were in the service of the Government or persons holding an office under the State Government or the Central Government or a local or other public authority" were deemed to be practising a profession within the meaning of this clause. It was urged that this explanation dealt specifically with persons in the employment of Government or a local body and impliedly excluded others who were employed in private companies or firms. The second point urged was that, in any case, Chaman Lal Plaintiff did not fall in any one of the categories mentioned in the schedule of trade, profession, calling and employment. The only category in which he could fall was "the superior servants of a private company or firm". Both the Courts below hold that employment in a private company did not fall within the purview of "practising any profession or art or carrying on any trade or calling" as provided in Clause (b). It was " further held that Chaman Lal being a mere clerk could not be said to be a superior servant of a private company and further that the Punjab National Bank was not a private company but a public limited company. In view of the above the suit of the Plaintiff seeking the declaration was decreed. The municipal committee has come up in appeal.

(2.) SO far as the first question is concerned, the same is concluded by a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court reported in Walaiti Ram v. The Municipal Committee, Rupar, 1960 P.L.R. 816, An identical matter was referred by me to a Division Bench and it was held that servants of private companies came within the scope of the taxing provisions contained in Section 61 of the Punjab Municipal Act.

(3.) IN view of the above, therefore, I accept this appeal, set aside the orders of the Courts below and dismiss the suit of the Plaintiff. In view, however, of the fact that the, point was not free from difficulty, the parties are left to bear their own costs throughout.