MUKESH PRASAD Vs. RAMGARH CANTONMENT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question raised in this writ application is whether the Cantonment Board is entitled to levy entry tax on the motor vehicles and consequently whether the respondent -State is justified in issuing order directing the authority of Cantonment Board not to realise entry tax from the goods vehicles entered in the Cantonment Board.

(2.) THE respondent No. 1 Ramgarh Cantonment Board published a notice in the newspaper inviting tender for collection of vehicles tax in Ramgarh Cantonment. Pursuant to that notice many persons including the petitioner submitted their tender and deposited the earnest money of Rs. 25,000/ - The petitioner being the highest bidder was directed to realise the vehicles tax @ Rs. 10/ -from each goods vehicle for the period of six months commencing from 12th March, 2001. An agreement to that effect was executed by and between the petitioner and the Cantonment Board. However, the respondent No. 2, Cantonment Executive Officer, Ramgarh Cantt. issued an office order dated 11.3.2001 restraining the petitioner from collecting tax from the vehicles in view of the order purported to have been passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No. 4. Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh. it is stated that when the answering respondent knew about the decision taken by the Cantonment Board for collection of toll, he issued a letter to the Board to keep the contract in abeyance till dispute is resolved by the Chief Secretary. It is stated that the Cantonment Board has no power to collect tax from the vehicle passes through the area of Cantonment Area.