NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE RAWAT Vs. G D MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a D B. Special Appeal Sled by the Notified Area Committee, Rawat Bhata and another, arising out of an order of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated July 15, 1980. passed in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1945 of 1979 filed by G.D Mehta against the State of Rajasthan and Ors. This appeal came up for admission before us on July 29, 1980. We heard Mr. H N Calla, Additional Government Advocate, for the appellant and Mr. Marudhar Mridul appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and perusing the record we arc of the view that this appeal is not worth admission for the following reasons The State Government vide its Notification dated February 28, 1975, which was published in the Rajasthan Raj Patra, dated March 6, 1975 signified its intention to declare revenue village Rawat Bhata as a Notified Area in exercise of its powers under Section 313 (1) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act and invited objections to this notification from the inhabitants of the said specified area within six weeks from the date of its publication. In response to the aforesaid notification, several inhabitants and organizations of the said specified area submitted their objections to the State Government. The respondent No 1 also objected to the notification issued under Sub -section (1) of Section 313 of the Act in the capacity of the General Secretary, Rajasthan Aaushakti Karamchari Saaagarsh Samiti, Rawat Bhata. The State Government, thereafter, vide its notification dated May 12, 1979, published in the Rajasthan Raj Patra dated August 30, 1979, declared revenue village Rawat Bhata to be a notified area and constituted a Notified Area Committee for that area and further declared that the Chairman, Vice -Chairman, and the members of the Notified Area Committee would be nominated by the State Government for a period of three years, and the Notified Area Committee would consist of 14 members out of which two members would be persons belonging to a scheduled caste and a scheduled tribe residing in the same area. Aggrieved by the aforesaid notification dated May 12, 1979, the petitioner respondent No. 1, invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court, by way of a writ petition, and prayed that an appropriate writ, direction or order may be issued directing the Commercial Taxes Officer, Chittorgarh, not to collect entertainment tax from Mahalaxmi Talkies by treating the Area to be the Notified Area. Later on, the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 submitted before the learned Single judge that no relief is claimed against the Commercial Taxes Officer.

(2.) THE learned Single Judge of this Court heard the writ petition, out of which this special appeal arises, and quashed the notification dated May 12, 1979, declaring revenue village Rawat Bhata to be a Notified area en the ground that there is nothing to show that the objections submitted by the several inhabitants and organizations of that area were duly considered by the State Government and orders were passed on such objections before declaring the said area to be a Notified Area under Sub -section (4) of Section 313 of the Act.

(3.) MR . Marudhar Mridul, appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1 on the other hand, contender that the word 'considered' used in Sub -section(4)of Section 313 of the Act mean? an examination of the objections with objectivity other than on mere subjective examination. According to his submission, the State Government in the present case did not consider and piss speaking order on each and t very objection made to the notification dated July 22, 1975 issued by the State Government under Sub -section (1) of Section 313 of the Act and so the mind of the State Government is not capable of being read as on what grounds the objections had been overruled. In support of his contention, Mr. Marudhar Mridual placed reliance on Ajantha Industries ns. C. Board, Direct Taxes AIR 1976 SC 436 and Siemens Engineering and Manufacturing Co. v. Union of India : AIR1976SC1785 .