R. SATYANARAYAN RAJU, K. N. WANCHOO, M. HIDAYATULLAH, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, V. RAMASWAMI
Municipal Board Of Hardwar – Appellant
Versus
Raghubir Singh Eto – Respondent
Judgement
HIDAYATULLAH, J. : There appeals involve a short common point of law and to appreciate it the narration of a few simple facts will be sufficient.
2. On October 29, 1941 the Hardwar Union Municipal Board (for brevity called the Board in this judgment) issued a notification (No. 4188/XI-416-41) by which it imposed a toll on motor vehicles and tongas entering or leaving the municipal limits with passengers at the rate of 2 annas per passenger. There were nine classes of persons who were exempted and one such class was persons travelling in motor vehicles and tongas from Rishikesh. Exemption certificates valid to the end of the calendar year were available in respect of some of the other classes. The notification purported to be issued in exercise of powers conferred by S. 128(1)(xiv) of the U. P. Municipalities Act. 1916 (U. P. Act 2 of 1916). Accompanying the notification were rules for the levy and collection of the toll. On February 22, 1955 a second notification was issued (No. 830/XXIII -16(C) -53-54), this time in exercise of the powers conferred by S. 128 (1)(vii) of the Act, and it increased the toll from 2 annas to 4 annas per passenger and added rickshaws to the veh
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.