MANGALAM CEMENT LTD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER :- In the above numbered six writ petitions the petition as have challenged the vires of the Rajasthan Land Tax Act, 1985 (for short, the State Act). The State Act was passed by the Rajasthan State Legislature in 1985 and received the assent of the Governor on July 31, 1985. According to its preamble it is law which has been enacted to provide for imposition of tax on land in areas other than urban areas in the State of Rajasthan and the matters incidental thereto. Under S.3 of the State Act the tax is imposed on the annual value of the land. Annual value has been defined in S.2(a) of the State Act. So far as the annual value in the case of land which are governed by the mining leases is concerned, it is given in S.2(a)(i) of that Act. The petitioners, have challenged the vires of the Act inter alia on the ground that it is beyond the legislative competence of the Legislature and covered under entry No. 54 of the Union List-I of the VIIth Schedule to the Constitution; that the State Act does not in letter or spirit impose tax on the land, and what is being taxed is not the land and in the garb of tax on the land dead rent and royalty on the minerals excavated is being charged; it creates hostile discrimination between various mine owners similarly situated; it is arbitrary and unreasonable; that the procedure provided in the State Act for provisional assessment is in violation of principles of natural justice.

(2.) Besides challenging the vires of the said Act on the aforesaid grounds in some of the writ petitions, the petitioners also challenged the assessment orders made against them for tax under the State Act by the Assessing Authorities and have also claimed that the acquisition of land for production of cement for commercial purposes has been held to be for public purposes and therefore the acquisition of land by the State Government for granting the same to the petitioners is exempted from the payment of land tax u/s. 4(1)(b)(iii) of the State Act. The petitioner company is exempted from the payment of tax.

(3.) Notice to show cause was given to the respondents and reply has been filed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2114/1985 and 269/86. As the points involved in all the writ petitions are identical, with the consent of the parties the replies have been read as replies in all the writ petitions. In the aforesaid return filed on behalf of the respondents it has been stated that the Act is within the legislative competence of the State Legislature and it is a tax on the land which the State Legislature is competent to levy. Only for the determination of the annual value the royalty is taken into consideration and the dead rent and royalty on the mineral are not the object of taxation.