1955 Supreme(Raj) 153

Rajasthan High Court
Dave & Modi, JJ.
Jainarain - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan - Respondents
D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Writ Applications Nos. 1 and 6 respectively of 1955
Decided On : May 12, 1955

Headnote:(a) Municipalities—Definition of boundaries—Such definition essential irrespective whether there is any law or not.(b) Municipalities—Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act, secs. 66(b), 46 (2) and 62—Publication-May be by any manner if inhabitants could have easy access—Publication by keeping copies at numerous places.(c) Municipalities—Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act, sec. 46(2)—Bye-laws—Governments sanction a condition precedent—Absence of sanction—Under Rajasthan Act rules are main thing.

       The taxing power of a municipal board must be limited to its own territorial limits and such limits must be defined by the State from which the municipality derives all authority to perform its functions. The importance of delimiting the boundaries of a municipality arises from the fundamental consideration that a municipality operates within a given area by virtue of the authority delegated to it by the State and it can only tax persons or property within its own limits and not beyond them. It is imperative that the territorial or geographical limits of the municipality within which it can effectively operate must be certain and precisely known and authoritatively defined. The argument that there was no law in the former State of Jodhpur which made such a requirement essential cannot be accepted. The necessity of prescribing the precise limits of a municipality in the absence of any statutory requirement still arises on considerations of common sense and common reason. A division for the purpose of election into a number of wards cannot amount to defining the limits of the municipality, (Para 5).

       The petitioners objection relates to the octroi tax which is said to have been levied in this municipality by notification No. 769 dated the 11/11/1954, (Mx. 4). It was said in this notification that the octroi rules and the schedule made by the municipal broad had been sanctioned by the Government and, therefore, at a meeting held on the 5/11/1954, the municipal board had decided that the new tax will be imposed with effect from the 1/01/1955. It was further state therein that any body who wanted to see the rates could do so in the office of the municipality or in the municipal chungi outposts at the railway station or in the mandi (i.e., the market) during office hours. A similar notice (Ex. 3) was issued with respect to the bye-laws framed by the municipal board and sanctioned by the Government in the same connection. Before the Governments sanction was received, a notice (Ex. 2) had been issued on the 9/03/1954, with respect to the rules under sec.60(b) of Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act, 1951, and with respect to the bye-laws, Ex. 1, under sec. 46(2) of the Rajasthan Act. by way of preliminary steps for the introduction of the tax in question and it was stated in those notices that the rules and bye-laws had been kept in the office of the municipal board and the municipal tax out posts and in the vachnalaya (public reading rooms) and, these could be inspected during office hours and objections were invited to the introduction of the said tax, rules and bye-laws to be filed within one month from the date of the respective notices. (Para 2).

       Held that sec. 60(b) does not prescribe the manner of publication. Such publication may certainly be by putting up the notice with the rules on the notice board of the municipality whether outside its office or elsewhere. But that is not and can not be the only method contemplated by law for the due publication of the rules etc If, in any particular case, it may be satisfactorily shown that the rules (which of course include the schedule) were published so that any inhabitant of the municipality could have easy access thereto, such publication would still substantially fall within the four corners of sec. 60(b) and would not be open to any serious objection. Also the requirements of sec. 62 as to publication after sanction were substantially met and there was sufficient publication of the rules after the sanction. (Paras 7 and 8)

       A comparison of the procedure laid down with regard to the framing and enforcement of the rules with that laid down for the bye-laws in the Act shows that in the case of bye-laws, the previous sanction of the Government must be obtained to the very introduction thereof as it were, before they are moved in and considered by the board; whereas no such previous sanction is required in the case of the rules. The obtaining of the previous sanction of the Government is a condition precedent to the passing of the bye-law in question, and the law is well established that such a condition must be strictly fulfilled before the bye-laws can be held to have been duly passed. (Para 9)

       Under the Rajasthan Act, however, the rules are the main thing and it is these which prescribe the classes of goods to be taxed and the rates therefor. The bye-laws do not affect them. The octroi is, therefore, valid. (Para 11)